The 

Greatest  American 

Alexander  Hamilton* 

An    Historical   Analysis   of   his    Life   and 

Works   together  with   a   Symposium   of 

Opinions  by  Distinguished  Americans 

By 

Arthur  Hendrick  Vandenberg 


Illustrated 


G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons 

New  York  and   London 

Ube   fmfcfcerbocfeer   press 

1921 


Copyright,  1921 

by 
Arthur  Hendrick  Vandenberg 

Printed  in  the  United  States  of  America 


To 

THE  HAMILTON   CLUB 
OF  CHICAGO 

WHICH,  BY  NAME  AND  HABIT,  HAS  DONE 

MORE  THAN  ANY  OTHER  AMERICAN 

GROUP  TO  PERPETUATE  THE 

MEMORY  AND  DOCTRINES 

OF 

"THE  GREATEST  AMERICAN" 

THIS  VOLUME  IS  RESPECTFULLY 
DEDICATED 


4C1C75 


THE   WHITE   HOUSE 

WASHINGTON 


March  25,  1921. 

My  dear  Mr.  Vanderiberg: 

I  am  deeply  interested  to  know  con 
cerning  your  proposal  to  impress  modern  America  with 
the  Nation's  debt  to  Alexander  Hamilton.  It  is  a 
most  worthy  undertaking  and  it  affords  me  particular 
satisfaction  to  taiow  ttet  you  have  taken  up  this 
undischarged  obligation.  No  man's  life  ever  gave  me 
greater  inspiration  than  Hamilton's;  and  no  man's 
life  ever  made  greater  contribution  to  the  founding 
and  the  functioning  of  constitutional  America.  The 
greater  modern  familiarity  with  Hamiltonisra  may 
become,  the  greater  will  be  modern  fidelities  to 
essential  American  institutions. 

Very  t  ruly  yours , 


Mr.  Arthur  K.  Vandenberg, 
Grand  Hapids,  Michigan. 


FOREWORD 

I  PRESENT  this  study  to  the  American  people  in 
the  profound  hope  that,  by  virtue  of  its  novelty  if 
not  its  merits,  it  may  challenge  some  new  measure 
of  popular  attention  to  the  history  of  the  United 
States.  The  greater  our  common  familiarity  with 
the  sacrifices,  the  hardships,  the  heroisms,  the 
martyrdoms,  the  aspirations,  the  evolutions,  the 
visions,  the  victories  that  have  made  America, 
the  greater  will  be  our  common  respect  for  the  con 
sequent  institutions  that  are  our  fortunate  inherit 
ance.  By  the  same  token,  lack  of  one  breeds 
lack  of  the  other;  and  we  are  suffering  today  an 
unhappy  poverty  in  both. 

We  modernists  too  frequently  are  prone  to 
scorn  history  as  a  useless  record  of  dead  things— 
a  mere  lamp  astern.  We  are  complacent,  epochal 
egotists,  pretending  that  our  own  transient  age 
has  leaped  beyond  the  reach  of  any  utility  the 
yesterdays  might  recommend.  Because  it  is  the 
easiest  way,  we  are  apt  to  ape  the  ignorance  which, 

vii 


jforetoorfc 

for  want  of  willingness  to  learn,  has  no  alternative 
but  to  boast  a  blithe  indifference  to  history,  and 
style  its  lessons  useless. 

Yet  the  Bible  is  no  more  to  religion  than  his 
tory  is  to  the  United  States.  Within  it  are  wrapped 
the  mighty  inspirations  that  have  made  us  what 
we  are.  To  worship  this  past,  with  eyes  rolled 
always  backward,  would  be  vain  idolatry.  But 
to  ignore  it  is  purblind  folly.  Even  granting 
Lamartine's  cynicism  that  "historians,  as  a  rule, 
show  us  more  of  art  than  veracity  in  their  produc 
tions,"  still  Montaigne  is  right  in  calling  history 
"the  very  anatomy  of  philosophy"  with  its 
"patterns  to  imitate" — quoting  Junius — and  its 
"examples  to  deter." 

We  shall  never  graduate  into  greater  sublimity 
of  character  than  has  chaptered  the  whole  past 
story  of  our  land;  and  from  no  more  wholesome 
source  than  this  can  we  borrow  strength  and  pre 
cept  for  the  crises  yet  to  come.  If  the  trend  of  the 
times  portends  a  drift  away  from  the  foundations 
that  have  borne  the  temple  of  popular  government 
for  nearly  1 50  years,  we  must  not  expect  a  resump 
tion  of  these  vitally  essential  fidelities  except  as 
we  create  a  mass  understanding  of  what  these 
foundations  were  when  the  Fathers  set  them  in 

viii 


jforetoorb 

the  ages.  If  the  trend  of  the  times  confesses  lightly 
valued  citizenship,  the  cure  is  to  renew  a  mass 
appreciation  of  what  this  citizenship  has  cost.  If 
we  need  purified  standards  of  unselfish  devotion  in 
our  seats  of  the  mighty,  there  are  no  models  that 
excel  those  with  which  American  history  is  jeweled. 
If  the  familiar  cry— "Back  To  The  Constitution" 
— is  an  apostrophe  to  sanity  and  wisdom,  the  story 
of  the  Constitution  is  the  starting  point  for  the 
crusades.  In  a  word,  no  one  thing  would  go  far 
ther  or  do  more  toward  Americanizing  America 
than  to  make  American  History  fashionable.  A 
discerning  California  millionaire  is  planning  to 
endow  a  movement  to  popularize  the  study  of 
science.  The  millionaire  who  endows  an  "Ameri 
can  History  Foundation  "•  —dedicated  to  a  wider 
mass  acquaintance  with  the  stupendous  story  of 
the  United  States — will  turn  his  excess  funds  to 
rare  account. 

This  life-story  of  the  nation  is  best  written  and 
reflected  in  the  lives  of  its  great  men.  The  achieve 
ments  of  peoples  and  periods  are  lived  in  the 
careers  of  their  dominant  leaders.  Thomas 
Carlyle  has  said:  "Universal  history  is  at  bottom 
the  history  of  the  great  men  who  have  worked 
here.  .  .  .  The  soul  of  the  whole  world's  his- 

ix 


jforetoorb 

tory,  it  may  justly  be  considered,  were  the  history 
of  these.  .  .  .  Could  we  see  them  well,  we 
should  get  some  glimpses  into  the  very  marrow  of 
the  world's  history."  Every  great  event  in  the 
evolution  of  a  nation  is  the  lengthened  shadow  of 
some  man  or  set  of  men  for  whom  the  event  is  the 
expression  of  character  and  the  reflex  of  aspiration. 
The  event  is  cold  and  second-hand  as  compared 
with  the  warm,  pulsating,  human  flesh  and  blood 
that  gave  it  genesis.  The  event  is  a  distant,  ab 
stract  thing  which  soon  becomes  a  mere  item  in 
chronology  and  is  accepted  with  perfunctory  grace 
as  a  thing  that  "happened"  without  particular 
travail  and  in  the  due  unfolding  of  an  automatic 
destiny.  But  the  human  genius  and  courage  and 
wisdom  and  will  that  ordered  the  event  are  living, 
throbbing,  dynamic  emotions  which  awaken  re 
sponsive  sensations  in  human  hearts  all  down  the 
calendars  of  posterity  and  register  an  intimate  and 
lasting  appreciation  of  what  the  birth  and  re-birth 
of  a  nation  costs.  The  best  and  most  useful 
laboratory  for  historical  research  and  reaction, 
then,  is  in  the  biographies  of  the  men  who  made, 
rather  than  in  the  observations  of  those  who  write, 
history.  If,  by  a  confessedly  startling  challenge  to 
habitual  American  public  opinion  in  my  nomination 


jforetoorb 

of  "The  Greatest  American,"  I  shall  succeed  in 
sending  my  countrymen  to  the  biographies  of  their 
own  favorite  figures  in  American  history,  seeking 
renewed  and  refreshed  knowledge  with  which  to 
rebut  my  conclusions,  this  volume  will  not  have 
failed  its  monitorial  ambitions. 

But  this  challenge  has  another  and  scarcely 
secondary  purpose.  The  twentieth  century,  in 
America,  and  the  eighteenth  century  are  farther 
apart,  more  remote  one  from  the  other,  than  any 
other  two  connated  cycles  in  history.  As  a  re 
sult,  the  busy  modern  generations  of  today  yield 
scant  acknowledgments  to  the  superlative  men  of 
those  distant,  inchoative  days  which  put  down  the 
rock  foundations  upon  which  all  institutional 
America  has  been  erected,  and  upon  which  our 
society  leans,  confidently  but  all  too  thoughtlessly, 
today.  Among  these  men,  none  holds  us  in  more 
completely  unrequited  debt  than  Alexander 
Hamilton.  America's  persistent  failure  to  pay  his 
memory  an  historical  obligation  beyond  adequate 
measurement  in  words  is  the  most  glaring  of  all 
the  Republic's  ingratitudes. 

In  his  great  book  upon  the  origin  and  growth  of 
the  Constitution,  Hannis  Taylor  bemoans  the  fact 
that  posterity  has  never  given  Pelatiah  Webster 

xi 


Jforetoorb 

proper  credits  for  his  pioneering  part  in  charting 
our  Constitutional  experiment.  "In  all  this," 
observes  Taylor,  "there  is  nothing  out  of  the 
usual  course.  The  achievements  of  contemplative 
men,  especially  when  they  are  far-reaching,  have 
often  had  to  wait  for  a  long  time  for  full  recogni 
tion.  Not  until  after  the  lapse  of  200  years 
was  it  admitted  that  Velasquez  was  one  of  the 
mightiest  painters  the  world  had  ever  known;  it 
was  quite  as  long  perhaps  before  Shakespeare,  as 
a  world  poet,  was  permitted  to  enter  into  the  full 
possession  of  his  kingdom."  If  this  philosophy 
fits  Pelatiah  Webster,  how  much  more  does  it  fit 
Alexander  Hamilton!  If  I  shall  succeed  in  turn 
ing  an  even  casual  illumination  upon  this  man  and 
this  national  debt,  even  though  few  among  you 
agree  with  the  extremes  of  my  conclusions,  there 
will  have  been  ample  justification  for  this 
undertaking. 

This  is  the  question  that  I  ask.  What  man,  all 
things  considered,  in  the  whole  history  of  our  coun 
try  down  to  date,  is  best  entitled  to  be  called 
"The  Greatest  American?"  To  answer  is  not  an 
easy  task.  There  are  varying  elements  of  great 
ness.  Sometimes  there  is  a  well-nigh  irreconcil 
able  conflict  between  the  counter-claims  of  favored 

xii 


jforetoorb 

eligibles.  The  relative  importance  of  eras  and 
periods  must  be  resolved.  Perfectly  natural  and 
normal  human  sympathies  and  prejudices  bring 
their  astigmatic  influences  to  bear.  Some  say  that 
there  is  no  such  thing  as  exclusive  and  paramount 
pre-eminence  for  any  one,  great  man;  that  defens 
ible  answer  to  such  a  hypothetical  question  is 
impossible.  Some  even  say  the  pursuit  is  absurd. 
But  I  respectfully  insist,  for  the  ample  reasons 
given,  that  there  is  a  real  utility  to  be  served;  and 
that,  upon  the  basis  of  exhibits  subsequent  hereto, 
it  is  possible  to  catch  and  reflect  the  sub-conscious 
verdict  of  our  people.  It  may  not  be  possible  to 
sustain  an  argument  at  every  point  of  test.  Nearly 
all  of  us  have  predilections;  and  nearly  all  of  us 
have  built  a  shrine  within  our  hearts  and  souls  to 
some  one  favorite  above  all  others.  But  it  is  good 
for  us  to  submit  our  convictions,  in  these  respects, 
to  comparative  scrutiny.  It  is  worth-while  for 
us  to  catechize  our  historical  opinions.  Who  is 
"The  Greatest  American":  and  why? 

The  first  section  of  this  book  is  a  symposium  in 
which  representative  men  of  today,  each  with 
some  peculiar  authority  of  opinion,  report  their 
answers  to  my  question.  I  am  eternally  grateful 
to  all  of  them  for  the  fine  spirit  in  which  they  have 

xiii 


jforetoorfc 

joined  in  this  academic  chase.  I  have  been  both 
honored  and  encouraged  by  their  interest  and 
their  helpfulness.  The  compilation  of  their  views 
is  a  valuable  contribution  to  the  shelves  of 
history,  if  no  further  credit  may  ever  be  assessed 
to  this  undertaking. 

The  second  section  is  a  study  of  the  life  of 
Hamilton,  presented,  I  make  bold  to  believe,  in  a 
new  fashion,  and  in  justification  of  my  own  pro 
found  faith  that,  all  things  considered,  he,  above 
all  others,  has  earned  the  right  to  pre-eminent 
American  historical  distinction.  Those  who  can 
not  yield  consent  to  my  verdict  will,  I  trust,  at 
least  yield  a  new  measure  of  acknowledgment  to 
the  memory  of  this  brilliant  statesman-soldier- 
publicist  who  flamed  like  a  meteor  across  colonial 
skies,  and,  changing  metaphors,  taught  our 
swaddling  Republic  first  to  creep  and  then  to  walk. 

I  have  made  free  draft  upon  all  available 
Hamiltonian  authorities,  with  scrupulous  foot 
note  efforts  to  grant  specific  credits  wherever  due. 
But  I  cannot  leave  to  mere  footnotes  an  ade 
quate  expression  of  my  obligation  to  certain  out 
standing  works  of  superior  utility.  First,  I  would 
say  that  when  Gertrude  Atherton  wrote  The  Con 
queror,  the  life  of  Hamilton  in  fiction  form,  she 

xiv 


jforetoorb 

wrote  what  is,  to  date,  the  great  American  novel. 
Never  did  any  writer  more  brilliantly  prove  my 
contention  that  biography  can  make  history  palat 
able  to  the  most  fickle  appetite.  "In  all  the  fairy 
tales,"  Hamilton  Wright  Mabie  once  wrote  in  his 
introduction  to  a  book  entitled  Men  Who  Have 
Risen,  "there  is  nothing  more  wonderful  than  the 
contrast  between  Franklin,  the  printer's  appren 
tice,  and  Franklin,  the  chief  figure  in  the  most 
brilliant  city  in  the  world;  between  Lincoln,  float 
ing  down  the  Ohio  on  a  flat-boat,  and  Lincoln, 
liberating  with  a  stroke  of  the  pen  4,000,000 
slaves."  Nor  is  there  anything  more  wonderful 
than  the  contrast  between  Hamilton,  a  friendless 
immigrant  upon  the  docks  of  Boston  at  the  tender 
age  of  fifteen,  and  Hamilton,  by  sheer  force  of 
human  intellect,  whip-lashing  a  snarling  New 
York  Convention  majority  into  unwilling  sub 
mission  to  the  Constitution,  at  the  age  of  thirty- 
one.  This  is  the  theme  that  The  Conqueror  has 
developed  in  a  masterly,  fascinating  way  that 
wholly  justifies  its  title. 

Then,  I  am  indebted  to  the  fine  understanding 
of  Hamilton  that  has  been  evidenced  by  United 
States  Senator  Henry  Cabot  Lodge  in  his  Life  of 
Hamilton  and  in  the  edition  of  The  Works  of  Alex- 

xv 


Jforetoorb 

ander  Hamilton  which  he  ably  edited.  Again,  the 
most  sympathetic  and  discerning  study  of  Hamil 
ton's  influence  upon  his  time. and  upon  posterity 
is  the  remarkable  Essay  on  American  Union  from 
the  pen  of  Frederick  Scott  Oliver,  a  Briton,  writ 
ing  in  1906  at  Checkendon  Court,  Oxfordshire. 
The  History  of  The  Republic  of  The  United  States  of 
America  as  Traced  in  the  Writings  of  Alexander 
Hamilton  and  His  Co-Temporaries,  by  John  C. 
Hamilton,  his  son,  in  1857,  and  the  son's  biography 
of  his  distinguished  sire,  written  in  1834,  have  been 
extremely  valuable.  These  and  many  other  refer 
ences  have  made  their  liberal  contribution  to  this 
compendium. 

Who  is  "The  Greatest  American"?  If  it  be 
Alexander  Hamilton,  it  is  a  type  that  exalteth  a 
nation.  If  it  be  some  other  among  the  super-men 
whom  destiny  seems  to  have  raised  for  each  suc 
ceeding  crisis,  no  greater  compliment  may  be  his 
than  to  assert  that  he  exceeds  Hamilton  in  his 
deserts.  To  the  tolerant  and  thoughtful  contem 
plation  of  my  fellow-countrymen,  these  pages  are 
committed. 

ARTHUR  HENDRICK  VANDENBERG. 

GRAND  RAPIDS,  MICHIGAN, 
February  4,  1921. 

xvi 


FOREWORD  . 


Contents 


PART  ONE 


LINCOLN 

WASHINGTON 

OTHERS 

PART  TWO— HAMILTON 

INTRODUCTION 

FROM  BIRTH  TO  DEATH 

THE  MASTER  BUILDER  OF  AMERICAN  UNION 

THE  FEDERALIST  . 

THE  FOUNDER  OF  THE  PUBLIC  CREDIT.. 

FIRST  IN  LITERATURE  AND  LAW    . 

THE  GREAT  SOLDIER     . 

PROPHETIC  PARAGRAPHS 


PART  THREE 


CONCLUSION 
INDEX  . 


PAGE 

vii 


3 
26 

43 


67 

74 
109 

143 

173 

206' 

240 

260- 


301 
349 


xvii 


SUustrattons; 


PAG« 


ALEXANDER  HAMILTON  .         .  Frontispiece 

Etched  by  Jacques  Reich. 

PRESIDENT  HARDING 's  LETTER       .         .          .  vii 

THE  HAMILTON  COAT-OF-ARMS       ....       67 

THE    HOUSE   WHERE    HAMILTON    WAS    BORN,    ST. 
CROIX,  NEVIS  ISLAND 74 

From  Life  of  Alexander  Hamilton,  by  Allen  McLane. 
Permission  of  Charles  Scribner's  Sons. 

THE  HAMILTON  MONUMENT  AT  WEEHAWKEN,  NEW 
JERSEY      ........     106 

THE  HAMILTON  "FLOAT"  IN  PARADE,  1788,  CELE 
BRATING  THE  RATIFICATION  OF  THE  CONSTITUTION     130 

THE  FIRST  MEETING  BETWEEN  GEORGE  WASHING 
TON  AND  HAMILTON 242 

From  the  picture  by  Chappell. 

THE    HAMILTON    STATUE   ON    HAMILTON    COLLEGE 
CAMPUS  AT  CLINTON,  NEW  YORK       .         .         .     280 

xix 


PAGE 

MRS.  ALEXANDER  HAMILTON  .     292 

From  the  picture  by  Inman. 

HAMILTON'S  TOMB  IN  TRINITY  CHURCHYARD,  NEW 
YORK  CITY        .  .296 

MODEL  OF  THE  HAMILTON  STATUE  TO  BE   PLACED 
ON  THE  TREASURY  PLAZA,  WASHINGTON      .         .     34* 


PART  ONE 


Htncoln 


"The  kindly,  earnest,  brave,  fore-seeing  man, 

Sagacious,  patient,  dreading  praise,  not  blame, 
New  birth  from  our  new  soil,  the  first  American." 


HERBERT  PUTNAM,  for  twenty  years  the 
Librarian  of  Congress  in  Washington,  nominates 
Abraham  Lincoln  as  the  man  who,  all  things  con 
sidered,  encompassing  the  entire  story  of  the  Re 
public  down  to  date,  is  entitled  to  pre-eminence 
as  "The  Greatest  American."  Mr.  Putnam  goes 
back  to  that  famous  Harvard  hour  on  July  21, 
1865,  when  James  Russell  Lowell  delivered  his 
inimitable  " Commemoration  Ode"  wherein  the 
poet  sang  his  inspired  apostrophe  to  the  martyred 
President  who  three  months  before  had  given  his 
blessed  life  to  his  country.  To  "hang  my  wreath 
on  his  world-honored  urn  "  was  Lowell's  dedication. 

"Here  was  a  type  of  the  true  elder  race, 
And  one  of  Plutarch's  men  talked  with  us  face  to 
face." 

3 


(greatest  American 

Mr.  Putnam  contents  himself,  in  answering  the 
question  which  is  at  the  root  of  this  symposium, 
with  quoting  Lowell's  beautifully  truthful  lines 
noted  at  the  head  of  this  chapter.  That  they 
nominate  "the  first  American,"  without  the  neces 
sity  even  of  calling  him  by  name,  to  the  satisfac 
tion  of  a  majority  of  the  people  of  modern  America 
is  amply  testified  by  the  fruits  of  my  inspection. 
Even  those  of  us,  myself  among  the  number,  who 
finally  give  paramount  consideration  to  some 
other  among  the  Titans  who  have  gloriously  served 
the  Republic  in  hour  of  crisis,  have  no  quarrel  with 
the  majority  verdict  which  thus  is  rendered.  It 
can  be  defended  in  any  forum  and  justified  in  any 
court.  Too  great  honor  cannot  be  accorded  this 
Mortal  Saviour  who  deserved  every  word  of 
epitomized  eulogy  with  which  Secretary  Gideon 
Welles  announced  his  death  to  the  American  Navy : 
"To  him  our  gratitude  was  justly  due,  for  to  him; 
under  God,  more  than  to  any  other  person,  are 
we  indebted  for  the  successful  vindication  of  the 
integrity  of  the  Union  and  the  maintenance  of  the 
power  of  the  Republic/*1 

That  a  nation-wide  referendum  would  return 
its  popular  majority  in  Lincoln's  favor,   if  this 
Order  No.  51,  April  15,  1865. 
4 


(greatest  American 


academic  quest  could  be  answered  in  the  voting 
places  of  the  nation,  is  indicated  by  the  trend  of 
answers  that  have  come  to  me  as  I  have  asked 
leaders  in  the  contemporary  thought  of  the  United 
States  to  assist  me  in  putting  down  this  record. 

11  1  think  our  greatest  American  was  Abraham 
Lincoln,"  says  William  Allen  White,  the  brilliant 
Kansas  Journalist.  "He  is  the  greatest  because 
he  comes  nearest  to  the  American  ideal.  If  I  were 
speaking  of  the  most  typical  American,  it  would  be 
Theodore  Roosevelt.  But  he  is  not  our  greatest 
American,  nor  does  he  approach  the  American 
ideal  so  nearly  as  Lincoln.  Lincoln  is  the  greatest 
man  this  modern  age  has  seen.  He  is  great  be 
cause  he  was  simple;  simple  because  he  was  kind/' 

"Comparisons  are  odious,"  observes  President 
William  Goodell  Frost  of  Berea  College,  Berea, 
Kentucky.  "They  are  often  misleading.  But 
Lincoln  seems  to  me  the  man  whom  we  should 
name  as  the  greatest  American  because  he  was  so 
distinctly  American,  because  he  represented  the 
north,  south,  east  and  west  more  perfectly  than 
any  other,  because  he  surmounted  the  greatest 
difficulties,  met  the  greatest  emergencies,  and  left 
the  deepest  impress  in  the  institutions  and  ideals 
of  our  country." 

5 


(greatest  American 


"America  has  produced  a  number  of  great  men, 
a  number  of  men  who  in  their  fields  outshone  all 
others,"  declares  Samuel  Gompers,  President  of 
the  American  Federation  of  Labor  for  nearly  four 
decades.  "But  it  has  always  been  my  conviction 
that  the  greatest  of  all  was  Lincoln.  No  other 
reached  to  such  heights  in  so  many  ways.  Lin 
coln's  character  and  his  work  must  be,  for  all  time, 
inspiring  to  Americans  as  the  highest  example 
our  country  has  produced." 

Though  Mr.  Gompers  and  Governor  Henry  J. 
Allen  of  Kansas  differ  violently  in  other  things  — 
with  an  eye  particularly  to  the  spirited  controversy 
between  them  over  the  principles  involved  in  the 
Kansas  Industrial  Judicature  Act  —  in  this  present 
matter  their  minds  meet.  "Both  because  of 
what  he  was  and  of  what  he  did,"  says  Governor 
Allen,  "I  regard  Abraham  Lincoln  as  the  greatest 
American.  The  world  is  full  of  great  intellectual 
accomplishments.  American  life  has  afforded  a 
proud  share  of  these.  Our  history  has  been  en 
riched  by  great  genius  in  science,  by  great  worth  in 
literature,  by  great  courage  in  its  military  his 
tory;  but  there  is  about  Lincoln  a  quality  which 
sets  him  apart.  In  my  judgment  he  is  the  first 
typical  American,  the  first  who  ever  contained 

6 


(greatest  American 


within  himself  all  the  strength  and  all  the  gentleness 
of  the  Republic.  It  takes  so  many  things  to  make 
greatness.  Many  Americans  have  been  greater 
in  some  things  than  was  Lincoln,  but  in  all  the 
qualities  which  round  him  out  and  make  him  fit 
for  the  high  place  you  are  creating  for  an  American, 
the  sum  total  of  Lincoln's  qualities  casts  the  ma 
jority.  We  have  been  blessed  by  many  great 
Americans.  I  would  like  to  vote  for  Roosevelt  for 
many  reasons.  For  many  reasons  I  would  like  to 
vote  for  Washington.  For  some  reasons  I  would 
like  to  vote  for  Alexander  Hamilton.  Some  other 
times  I'd  like  to  be  for  Edison.  In  other  moods 
I'd  like  to  be  for  Longfellow  and  sometimes  I  think 
of  Wendell  Phillips;  and  sometimes  the  greatness 
of  the  courage  of  a  lunatic  by  the  name  of  John 
Brown  overwhelms  me.  But  in  the  natural  evolu 
tion  of  events  we  were  bound  to  have  a  man  like 
Washington.  We  were  bound  to  have  great  scien 
tists,  great  writers,  great  orators,  great  soldiers;  but 
I  think  that  only  divine  providence  could  have 
given  us  for  a  great  hour  of  need  a  man  who  took 
possession  of  the  hour  and  lived  up  to  all  of  its  de 
mands  in  a  perfectly  human  fashion  as  did  Abraham 
Lincoln.  Certainly  the  period  through  which  we 
have  just  passed  produced  no  such  result." 

7 


<§reate£t  American 

Governor  Allen  speaks  of  Thomas  A.  Edison, 
whose  rich  genius  has  contributed  so  prodigally  to 
the  progress  and  convenience  of  the  modern  era. 
Edison  himself,  asked  to  nominate  the  greatest 
American,  promptly  and  unequivocally  replies  with 
the  name  of  Lincoln. 

With  similar  expressive  and  unqualified  finality, 
Lincoln's  eminence  comes  back  to  me  in  one  single 
magic  word  from  President  John  Grier  Hibben  of 
Princeton  University;  from  ex-United  States  Sena 
tor  Lawrence  Y.  Sherman  of  Illinois;  from  Rev. 
Newell  Dwight  Hillis  of  Brooklyn's  Plymouth 
Church;  from  President  F.  W.  Gunsaulus  of  the 
Armour  Institute  of  Technology  in  Chicago; from 
the  learned  and  honored  Charles  W.  Eliot,  for 
forty  years  the  President  of  Harvard  University; 
from  Dr.  Marion  L.  Burton,  now  President  of  the 
Univeristy  of  Michigan ;  from  Dr.  Henry  Churchill 
King,  President  of  Oberlin  College  in  Ohio;  from 
Dr.  John  Huston  Finley,  formerly  New  York  State 
Commissioner  of  Education  and  President  of  the 
University  of  the  State  of  New  York,  and  more 
recently  associated  with  the  New  York  Times; 
from  ex-United  States  Senator  William  Alden 
Smith  of  Michigan;  from  Franklin  K.  Lane,  Secre 
tary  of  the  Interior  in  the  Cabinet  of  President 

8 


(greatest  American 


Wilson;  from  United  States  Senator  Philander  C. 
Knox  of  Pennsylvania;  from  Dr.  H.  M.  Bell, 
President  Emeritus  of  Drake  University  in  Iowa; 
from  Major  General  Enoch  H.  Crowder,  honored 
veteran  of  American  participation  in  the  great 
world  war;  from  ex-President  Harry  B.  Hutchins 
of  the  University  of  Michigan;  from  United  States 
Senator  Knute  Nelson  of  Minnesota;  from  Henry 
L.  Stoddard,  Editor  of  the  New  York  Mail;  from 
United  States  Senator  Arthur  Capper  of  Kansas; 
and  from  John  Hays  Hammond,  the  world  famous 
engineer. 

This  is  an  imposing  jury.  Such  a  diversity  of 
high  advocates  does  supreme  honor  to  the  memory 
of  any  man.  It  has  come  to  pass  quite  as  prophe 
sied  in  Senator  Sumner's  resolution  from  the  un 
official  special  committee  (Lincoln's  death  occurred 
during  a  congressional  recess)  appointed  from  the 
thirty-ninth  Congress  on  April  17,  1865,  "that  in 
the  life  of  Abraham  Lincoln,  who  by  the  benignant 
favor  of  republican  institutions  rose  from  humble 
beginnings  to  the  heights  of  power  and  fame" 
there  is  to  be  recognized  "an  example  of  purity, 
simplicity,  and  virtue  which  should  be  a  lesson  to 
mankind,"  while  in  his  death  there  is  to  be  recog 
nized  "a  martyr  whose  memory  will  become  more 

9 


Greatest  American 

precious  as  men  learn  to  prize  those  principles  of 
constitutional  order  and  those  rights — civil,  politi 
cal,  and  human — for  which  he  was  made  a  sacrifice." 

Winston  Churchill,  the  great  American  novelist 
whose  writings  disclose  an  intimate  understanding 
of  his  country's  history,  puts  his  opinion  in  this 
fashion:  "Abraham  Lincoln;  to  my  mind,  in  addi 
tion  to  great  gifts  of  statesmanship,  he  had  the 
quality  of  selflessness  which  is  real  greatness,  and 
the  knowledge  of  men  that  comes  from  love." 

Proclaiming  the  difficulty  of  considering  "all 
things"  in  measuring  the  relative  eminence  of 
leaders,  United  States  Senator  Gilbert  M.  Hitchcock 
of  Nebraska  says:  "Giving  due  weight  to  his 
enormous  responsibility,  to  the  difficulties  of  his 
position,  to  the  immense  importance  of  the  out 
come,  and  to  his  combination  of  moral  force, 
remarkable  tact,  and  intellectual  strength,  I 
nominate  Abraham  Lincoln  as  the  greatest  Ameri 
can  of  history." 

The  late  Bishop  Charles  Sumner  Burch  of  New 
York  declared  his  belief  in  Lincoln's  super-emi 
nence  "not  because  of  his  wonderful  accomplish 
ment  in  the  face  of  the  most  trying  difficulties,  to 
free  the  slaves  and  save  the  Union,  but  because 
of  his  influence  over  the  entire  English-speaking 

10 


(Greatest  American 


world.  He  was  a  man  of  vision  and  a  man  who 
had  the  capacity  for  putting  his  vision  into  accom 
plishment.  Next  to  Abraham  Lincoln,  I  regard 
Theodore  Roosevelt  as  the  greatest  American." 

Not  the  least  striking  thing  disclosed  in  the 
catalogue  of  Lincoln  nominators  is  the  fashion  in 
which  extremes  meet  and  find  a  common  ground  in 
their  addresses  to  his  memory.  John  D.  Rocke 
feller,  Jr.,  promptly  answers  "Lincoln"  upon  this 
roll-call.  No  less  promptly  does  Upton  Sinclair, 
the  antithesis  of  Rockefeller,  respond  that  "the 
greatest  American  in  wise  kindness  was  probably 
Abraham  Lincoln,  that  is,  he  was  the  one  who 
managed  to  make  these  qualities  most  effective  in 
the  world."  Sinclair  adds:  "He  was  killed,  and 
there  has  been  very  little  of  either  wisdom  or  kind 
ness  that  has  been  effective  in  America  since  his 
death." 

Again,  there  is  adulatory  eloquence  in  parallel 
ing  the  verdicts  of  John  Spargo,  one  of  the  greatest 
Socialists  America  has  ever  produced,  and  Thomas 
W.  Lamont,  one  of  the  greatest  of  America's 
modern  capitalists. 

"It  is  very  difficult  to  answer  such  a  question 
with  any  degree  of  authority  or  finality,"  writes 
Spargo.  "Not  only  have  there  been  many  men 

ii 


<§reatest  American 

remarkable  for  their  great  gifts  of  statesmanship, 
but  the  question  involves  greater  difficulties  than 
mere  selection  between  individuals.  For  example, 
if  we  grant  the  greatness  of  Lincoln  and  his  wisdom 
in  meeting  the  critical  problems  of  his  time,  can 
there  be  any  positive  assurance  that  he  would  have 
met  with  equal  success  the  greater  problems  of 
the  world  war  recently  ended?  All  in  all,  if  I  were 
obliged  to  make  such  a  selection,  I  should,  I  th'nk, 
decide  for  Lincoln.  His  fine  fidelity  to  the  basic 
ideals  of  America,  would,  alone,  place  him  upon 
the  pinnacle  of  my  affectionate  and  reverent  re 
gard.  To  that  great  quality  must  be  added  a 
statesmanlike  wisdom  in  dealing  with  the  practical 
problems  of  his  day,  amounting  to  real  genius." 

"Most  Americans,"  writes  Lamont,  "called 
upon  to  answer  your  question  by  naming  their 
country's  greatest  man  must,  I  believe,  hesitate 
between  its  founder  and  its  preserver.  Washing 
ton  was  a  great  soldier  whose  military  triumphs, 
joined  to  a  patient  and  wise  leadership,  founded 
the  nation.  Lincoln  was  a  great  statesman  who 
directed  military  power  and  moral  force  to  the 
preservation  of  the  state  and  the  destruction  of 
human  slavery  within  it.  Varied  in  personality, 
temperament  and  method,  George  Washington 

12 


(greatest  American 

and  Abraham  Lincoln  were  shown  by  heroic  tests 
to  share  the  same  basic  gifts  and  virtues — vision, 
faith,  courage,  fortitude,  patience  and  human 
sympathy.  Both  hold  our  reverent  admiration. 
But  Lincoln,  through  the  tragedy  of  life  among  a 
divided  people  and  of  death  by  assassination, 
touches  our  hearts  more  nearly.  Therefore,  if 
between  these  two  sublime  personalities  we  must 
make  decision,  sympathy  is  likely  to  lead  us  to 
declare  Lincoln  the  greatest  American." 

United  States  Senator  Hiram  W.  Johnson  of 
California  confronts  this  same  dual  appeal  in 
analyzing  his  judgment.  "Had  you  asked  me  to 
place  two  Americans  on  the  highest  eminence  of 
greatness,  I  would  have  had  little  difficulty,"  says 
Johnson.  "Washington  and  Lincoln  typify  Ameri 
can  greatness.  They  represent,  however,  such 
different  types  that  it  is  almost  impossible  to  place 
one  before  the  other.  If  you  insist  upon  the 
choice,  my  temperament  would  place  Lincoln 
first,  although  my  judgment  would  rebel  at  making 
a  choice  between  the  two." 

Professor  Andrew  G.  McLaughlin,  head  of  the 
history  department  of  the  University  of  Chicago 
and  editor  of  many  historical  publications,  is  con 
tent  to  observe,  "I  suppose  Lincoln  is  the  greatest 

13 


(greatest  American 

American,  but  I  don't  know."  He  adds  that  both 
Washington  and  Jefferson  deserve  close  study  ere 
the  die  is  cast. 

President  C.  A.  Richmond  of  Union  College, 
Schenectady,  says:  "I  have  no  hesitation  in  saying 
that  no  one  in  our  history  embodies  so  much  that 
is  highest  and  most  distinctive  in  our  American 
life  as  Abraham  Lincoln." 

President  Ernest  M.  Hopkins  of  Dartmouth 
College,  the  traditional  collegiate  shrine  of  Daniel 
Webster,  protests  that  it  is  practically  impossible 
to  give  any  designation  for  the  title  of  ' '  the  great 
est  American"  without  implying  large  injustice 
to  many  others  than  the  man  named.  However, 
President  Hopkins  expresses  the  personal  convic 
tion  that  Abraham  Lincoln  nearest  justifies  such 
exaltation. 

Chancellor  James  R.  Day  of  Syracuse  Univer 
sity,  disliking  to  select  any  one  of  the  great  men  of 
America  as  the  greatest,  says:  "However,  I  have 
cherished  the  thought  for  some  time  that  Lincoln 
was  the  great  composite  character  of  Americans, 
and  I  would  be  forced  to  say  that  it  is  my  conviction 
that  he  is  the  greatest  American/' 

Rev.  Henry  N.  Couden,  blind  Chaplain  of  the 
House  of  Representatives  in  Washington,  a  patriot 


(greatest  American 


who  last  saw  his  country's  flag  upon  the  field  of 
battle,  and  a  scholar  who  has  had  unusual  oppor 
tunities  to  study  public  service  in  its  processes 
of  rendition,  unhesitatingly  pronounces  Lincoln's 
hame  in  answer  to  my  question.  "I  am  quite 
familiar,"  says  he,  "with  the  leading  Americans 
and  I  place  Lincoln  at  the  top  of  the  men  who  have 
done  things  that  live.  All  things  considered,  he  is 
the  greatest  of  them  all  and  the  service  he  rendered 
his  country  is  unparalleled.  God  bless  his  name 
and  may  he  be  ever  an  example  to  the  American 
youth." 

Ex-Governor  Chase  S.  Osborn  of  Michigan, 
brilliant  in  a  diversity  of  talents,  replies  with 
typical  vigor.  "I  pronounce  Abraham  Lincoln 
the  greatest  American.  Not  one  other  has  been 
in  his  sphere.  He  alone  was  anointed  of  God 
with  crystal  superiority  at  a  time  when  the  God 
forces  of  America  needed  leading  as  never  before  or 
since.  Lincoln  sprang  from  the  lowly.  He  guided 
the  nation  through  the  greatest  peril  that  ever 
threatened  the  destruction  of  a  grouped  people. 
But  words  are  as  nothing.  Washington  was  not 
an  American.  He  was  a  colonial  British  aristo 
crat  who  was  fortified  from  Heaven  during  the 
agonizing  and  prolonged  birth  throes  of  a  nation. 

15 


(greatest  American 

He  welded  with  blood  and  courage  and  love  three 
million  people.  On  what  could  easily  have  been 
the  death  bed  of  America,  Lincoln  saved  the  co 
hesive  lives  of  thirty  millions." 

Ex-Governor  Frank  O.  Lowden,  from  the  great 
commonwealth  of  Illinois  which  boasts  Lincoln  as 
an  adopted  son,  unhesitatingly  joins  the  symphony 
of  Lincoln  praise.  For  Governor  Lowden,  Lincoln 
was  and  is  the  greatest  American.  Speaking  be 
fore  the  Middlesex  Club  in  Boston  upon  an  an 
niversary1  of  Lincoln's  birth  he  referred  back  to 
Lowell's  "Commemoration  Ode"  and  upon  it 
built  a  tribute  endorsing  all  that  Lowell  had  sung. 
A  year  before,  upon  similar  occasion,  he  had  said: 
"The  cause  of  democracy  is  the  cause  of  humanity. 
It  concerns  itself  with  the  welfare  of  the  average 
man.  Lincoln  was  its  finest  product.  In  life,  he 
was  its  noblest  champion.  In  death,  he  became  its 
saint.  His  tomb  is  now  its  shrine.  His  country's 
cause,  for  which  he  lived  and  died,  has  now  become 
the  cause  of  all  the  world.  It  is  more  than  half  a 
century  since  his  countrymen,  with  reverent  heads, 
bore  him  to  his  grave.  And  still  his  pitiless  logic 
for  the  right,  his  serene  faith  in  God  and  man,  are 
the  surest  weapons  with  which  democracy,  hu- 

1  February  12,  1919. 

16 


(greatest  American 


manity  and  righteousness  now  fight  their  ancient 
foe.  .  .  .  Lincoln's  spirit  still  walks  the  earth. 
His  life  remains  the  greatest  resource  to  the  forces 
fighting  for  freedom  and  righteousness  throughout 
the  world." 

John  R.  Rathom,  Editor  of  the  Providence 
Journal  and  Bulletin  and  one  of  the  prominent 
journalists  of  today,  declares  that  Lincoln  is 
justly  entitled  to  be  known  as  the  greatest  Ameri 
can.  "  It  is  unfortunate,  '  '  observes  Rathom,  '  '  that 
Lincoln's  name  has  been  used  so  much  by  poli 
ticians  and  stump  orators  for  their  own  personal 
ends  and  their  own  selfish  ambitions.  But  the  fact 
remains  that  Lincoln's  typical  rise  from  apparently 
hopeless  surroundings,  the  sterling  common  sense 
with  which  he  guided  the  country  through  the 
greatest  peril  of  its  national  life,  the  man's  devo 
tion  to  duty  and  his  splendid  patriotism  must,  in 
my  judgment,  win  for  him  in  future  generations 
the  title  of  the  greatest  American.  No  figure  in 
our  history  ever  faced  such  problems,  ever  tri 
umphed  over  such  violent  opposition  or  ever 
showed  such  magnanimity  of  spirit  in  dealing  with 
the  enemies  of  himself  and  his  country." 

Ex-Governor  Woodbridge  N.  Ferris  of  Michi 
gan,  distinguished  as  an  educator  as  well  as  a  public 

17 


(greatest  American 

man,  declares,  "  without  a  moment's  hesitation  I 
say  Abraham  Lincoln  is  entitled  to  be  called  the 
greatest  American.  The  Declaration  of  Inde 
pendence  is  the  greatest  exposition  of  America's 
ideal.  Abraham  Lincoln  was  the  incarnation  of 
that  ideal." 

Congressman  Simeon  D.  Fess  of  Ohio,  fre 
quently  referred  to  as  the  "Scholar  of  the  House," 
illuminates  his  answer  with  telling  analysis.  "Five 
men,"  says  he,  "stand  out  quite  apart  when  judged 
by  their  abilities  and  by  what  they  accomplished. 
First  is  Washington,  for  his  achievement  in  lead 
ing  the  army  to  victory,  for  his  successful  conduct 
of  the  federal  Constitutional  Convention,  and  for 
his  inauguration  of  the  new  government.  Second, 
Hamilton  must  remain  the  greatest  constructive 
genius  yet  produced  in  North  America.  Third, 
John  Marshall  had  most  to  do  in  guiding  the  new 
nation  in  its  struggle  to  secure  proper  federal  rela 
tions  between  nation  and  state,  in  his  wonderful 
decisions  on  questions  of  nationality.  Fourth, 
Webster  in  a  way  stands  out  as  a  constructive 
lawyer  and  orator,  whose  service  came  at  a  time 
when  constitutional  government  was  on  trial.  His 
reply  to  Hayne  had  the  effect  of  an  amendment  to 
the  constitution.  Lincoln  completes  the  list.  In 

18 


<§reate*t  American 

my  judgment  he  possessed  qualities  of  influence 
tin  equaled  by  any  others.  He  was  more  American 
than  any  of  the  others.  In  fact,  he  was  an  Ameri 
can  product  in  the  truest  sense.  Measured  by 
results,  I  am  of  the  opinion  that  Lincoln  must 
stand  first  in  America.  He  had  all  the  talents  of 
ability  of  thought,  of  breadth  of  sympathy,  and 
power  of  will.  He  employed  them  all  for  the  good 
of  the  country  in  the  hour  of  her  greatest  crisis,  and 
won  a  struggle  which  must  ever  be  regarded  the 
greatest  event  in  the  history  of  civil  government, 
the  preservation  of  the  Union  and  the  perpetuation 
of  representative  government  in  the  world  as  the 
ultimate  form  of  popular  control — the  greatest 
achievement  yet  accomplished  in  history.  The 
work  of  the  other  leaders  was  but  a  preface  to  that 
of  Lincoln." 

One  of  the  leading  historical  authorities  in 
the  United  States  today  is  Professor  Frederick 
J.  Turner  of  Harvard.  Professor  Turner  once 
dubbed  Benjamin  Franklin  the  first  "great  Ameri 
can/'1  But  Professor  Turner  turns  from  Franklin 
to  Lincoln  when  confronted  with  the  selection  of 
the  greatest  American.  ' '  The  greatest  American, ' ' 
declares  Professor  Turner,  "must  be  representa- 

1  Magazine  article  in  The  Dial,  Chicago,  1888,  p.  204. 

19 


(Greatest  American 

lively  greatest,  as  well  as  an  admittedly  great  man 
among  those  whom  the  world  at  large  recognizes 
as  such.  He  must  be  the  greatest  in  ways  that 
are  characteristically  American.  By  this  test  our 
earliest  great  American  was  Franklin,  and  our 
greatest  was  Abraham  Lincoln.  Washington's 
elemental  greatness,  his  balance  and  judgment, 
and  steadfastness,  and  his  relation  to  our  inde 
pendence  place  him  among  the  great  men  of  the 
world.  But  the  American  type  of  Democracy — 
the  Democracy  that  was  associated  with  the  ac 
tivities  and  ideals  of  our  pioneer  age,  and  with  our 
slavery  contest,  and  the  maintenance  of  our  type 
of  government  and  of  society  on  a  national  scale- 
is  more  distinctive  than  our  struggle  for  independ 
ence,  though  the  two  are  intimately  connected ;  and 
if  it  is  a  question  of  the  most  representative 
American  on  the  highest  plane  in  these  respects,  I 
choose  Lincoln.  Jefferson  had  too  philosophical  a 
mind  to  be  quite  the  choice,  though  he  was  the 
prophet  of  American  Democracy.  He  lacked  the 
high-minded,  humane  quality  of  Lincoln  also. 
Jackson  was  a  dynamic  expression  of  some  of  the 
most  vital  American  qualities,  but  his  personality 
does  not  impress  me  as  Lincoln  does.  Hamilton 
had,  as  Talleyrand  said,  'divined  Europe/  but  he 

20 


(greatest  American 

had  not  divined  America,  though  he  was  essential 
to  its  welfare.  I  doubt  whether  any  of  our  scien 
tists  or  men  of  letters  have  achieved  the  world 
place  that  our  men  of  political  life  have  achieved. 
Lincoln  was,  as  Emerson  said,  the  whole  history 
of  the  American  people  in  his  time.  Through  his 
forebears  and  in  his  own  experience  he  stands  for 
the  moving  pioneer  Democracy  which  opened  a 
new  continent  to  a  new  type  of  man.  Lincoln  was 
the  'new  birth  of  our  new  soil,  the  first  American,' 
as  Lowell  put  it ;  and  when  he  calls  Lincoln  '  one  of 
Plutarch's  men'  he  is  speaking  as  truly  as  he  is 
aptly.  He  had  a  character  and  originality  that 
rank  him  with  the  world's  greatest.  Moreover, 
in  personifying  the  American  type  of  Democracy 
and  of  service  to  society,  Lincoln  embodied  the 
promise  of  the  future  to  the  Old  World  as  well  as 
the  New.  Roosevelt  and  Wilson  are  too  near  our 
own  time  to  be  seen  in  due  perspective;  but  I  be 
lieve  they  will  both  live  among  our  greatest  Ameri 
can  types.  On  the  whole,  I  vote  for  Abraham 
Lincoln." 

Veteran  Congressman  Cannon  of  Illinois,  en 
deared  to  millions  of  American  hearts  as  "  Uncle 
Joe"  and  personally  familiar  with  all  the  great 
Americans  of  more  than  half  a  century,  turns  aff ec- 

21 


(greatest  American 

tionately  to  Lincoln.  Says  he:  "If  we  apply  the 
Master's  definition — '  By  their  fruits  ye  shall  know 
them* — I  believe  that  Lincoln,  the  Emancipator 
and  the  Preserver  of  the  Union,  was  the  greatest 
American.  Lincoln  as  President  had  one  absorb 
ing  thought  and  purpose,  to  save  the  Union,  with 
slavery  if  he  must,  without  slavery  if  he  could,  but 
to  save  the  Union.  His  singleness  of  purpose  to 
fulfill  his  obligation  and  oath  to  'preserve,  protect, 
and  defend  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,' 
was  paramount,  and  'his  love  of  country  left  no 
room  for  love  of  self.'  'Greater  love  hath  no  man 
than  this,  that  a  man  lay  down  his  life  for  his 
friends.'" 

Secretary  of  the  Navy  Edwin  Denby,  who  while 
President  of  the  Detroit  Board  of  Commerce  glori 
ously  demonstrated  his  American  fidelities  during 
the  hard  crises  of  world  war  by  enlisting  as  a  pri 
vate  in  the  Marines,  is  another  to  whom  Lincoln 
will  always  be  "The  Greatest  American."  "Since 
I  have  been  old  enough  to  consider  such  subjects," 
declares  Secretary  Denby,  "I  have  never  varied 
in  my  belief.  Lincoln's  words  and  thoughts  are 
woven  into  the  very  fabric  of  the  American  spirit. 
He  more  dominates  our  political  thinking  than  any 
other  man  who  ever  lived;  and  his  crystal  clear 

22 


&mertcan 

enunciation  of  principles  is  rapidly  being  accepted 
by  the  world  at  large,  as  well  as  by  the  United 
States,  as  the  last  expression  of  true  democracy." 

Rabbi  Stephen  S.  Wise  of  the  New  York  Free 
Synagogue  acknowledges  the  difficulty  of  choosing 
one  American  supreme  in  service  among  so  many 
sons  and  daughters  of  mighty  stature.  "But  if  I 
had  to  make  a  choice,  which  I  am  loath  to  do,  I 
should  name  Lincoln.  He  was  not  our  first,  but 
he  is  our  best  and  greatest.  I  name  him  the  great 
est  of  Americans  because  I  believe  that  he  more 
nearly  than  any  other  American  is  America  in 
carnate.  The  spirit  of  America  ruled  him  as 
perhaps  none  other.  Washington  went  before 
Lincoln  and  was  one  of  the  makers  of  America ;  but 
America  made  Lincoln  above  and  beyond  any 
other,  America's  man." 

United  States  Senator  Frank  B.  Willis,  who  suc 
ceeded  President  Harding  from  Ohio  in  the  Upper 
House  of  Congress,  declares  that  Alexander  Hamil 
ton  was  the  greatest  constructive  genius  this 
country  has  ever  seen.  "Yet,"  he  observes,  "the 
question  arises  whether  constructive  ability  is  a 
true  test  of  greatness.  My  own  judgment  is  that 
it  is  not  a  complete  test.  Greatness  is  difficult 
to  define  and  to  prescribe  a  standard  is  still  more 

23 


(greatest  American 

difficult.  But  I  venture  my  own  opinion  that, 
measured  from  all  standpoints,  Abraham  Lincoln 
was  our  greatest  American." 

John  Burroughs,  America's  supreme  modern 
naturalist,  similarly  nominates  Lincoln.  "In 
literature,"  he  adds,  "Walt  Whitman  is  the 
greatest  American." 

Ex-United  States  Senator  Charles  S.  Thomas  of 
Colorado  speaks  for  Lincoln.  "I  answer  without 
hesitation,"  declares  the  Senator.  "My  conclu 
sion  is  based  upon  my  own  conception  of  his  charac 
ter,  supplemented  by  that  of  Emerson  and  the  late 
Henry  W.  Grady.  From  the  standpoint  of  purely 
intellectual  equpiment  and  attainment,  Alexander 
Hamilton  is  a  close  second.  He  lacks,  however, 
that  touch  with  the  soil  and  intimate  knowledge  of 
people  which  so  characterized  the  career  of  the 
martyred  President." 

The  eloquent  and  picturesque  W.  Bourke 
Cockran  of  New  York  declares  that  Lincoln  was 
not  merely  the  greatest  American  who  ever  lived, 
but  the  greatest  figure  in  all  history.  "In  the  light 
of  his  achievements  and  his  opportunities — or 
rather,  lack  of  opportunities  to  qualify  himself  for 
public  service — Lincoln  stands  absolutely  alone  and 
must  forever  remain  the  phenomenon  of  all  the 

24 


American 


ages.  To  any  one  familiar  with  his  life,  this  con 
clusion  must  be  self-evident.  Those  who  are 
ignorant  of  his  deeds  —  the  circumstances  under 
which  they  were  wrought  —  the  sublime  eloquence 
with  which  his  policies  were  expounded,  vindicated, 
made  possible  —  the  consummate  leadership  by 
which  they  were  made  triumphant  —  the  states 
manship,  almost  inspired,  which,  after  having 
formulated  in  terms  never  paralleled  for  lucidity 
the  duty  of  a  nation  face  to  face  with  a  crisis  in 
volving  its  existence,  sustained  it  through  the 
trials,  reverses  and  sufferings  of  civil  war  and  re 
strained  it  in  the  hour  of  triumph  within  the  bounds 
of  a  moderation  which  made  forever  secure  the 
fruits  of  victory  —  and  all  this  with  no  educational 
advantages  whatever  —  should  be  encouraged  to 
study  them,  not  for  the  sake  of  his  fame  which  is 
secure  and  certain  to  grow  continuously  till  the 
end  of  time,  but  to  broaden  their  conceptions  of 
what  America  has  contributed  to  the  civilization 
of  Christendom." 


I  HAVE  said  that  I  believe  a  majority  of  Ameri 
cans  rate  Lincoln  first  among  the  pre-eminent  men 
who  have  highly  served  the  Republic.  If  this  is 
true,  as  disclosed  by  this  symposium,  it  is  equally 
true  that  second  only  to  Lincoln,  George  Washing 
ton  is  most  firmly  enshrined  in  the  hearts  and 
grateful  recollections  of  his  countrymen.  In  a 
majority  of  instances,  the  argument  lies  between 
Washington  and  Lincoln.  Frequently,  as  sub 
sequently  disclosed  contemporary  leaders  in  Ameri 
can  public  thought  refuse  to  choose  between  the 
two.  But  the  paramount  pre-eminence  of  Wash 
ington  finds  none  the  less  eloquent  endorsement 
from  as  distinguished  a  roll  of  modern  men  as  ever 
joined  in  tribute  to  the  memory  of  any  mighty 
contributor  to  the  fundamental  welfare  of  a  people. 
The  sentiment  of  Lafayette — "In  my  idea,  General 
Washington  is  the  greatest  man;  for  I  look  upon 
him  as  the  most  virtuous" — finds  profound  reflec 
tion  in  many  a  modern  estimate;  and  Washington's 

26 


(greatest  American 


own  sentiment,  expressed  when  declining  a  military 
escort  upon  the  occasion  of  his  inauguration  in 
1789  —  "I  require  no  guard  but  the  affections  of 
the  people"  —  is  justified  in  many  a  modern  verdict 
upon  the  question  we  discuss. 

He  was  "first  in  war,  first  in  peace,  and  first  in 
the  hearts  of  his  countrymen,'*  said  Henry  Lee, 
back  in  the  days  that  knew  him  by  his  intimate 
works. 

"I  have  no  disposition  to  take  issue  with  the 
common  verdict  which  college  boys  render  in  these 
familiar  words,"  declares  President  John  H. 
MacCracken  of  Lafayette  College,  Pennsylvania, 
nominating  Washington  as  his  greatest  American. 

Referring  to  this  same  traditional  and  historical 
phrase  with  which  Washington's  name  and  fame 
will  always  be  linked  all  down  the  avenues  of  time, 
Frank  B.  Noyes,  Editor  of  The  Washington  Star 
and  President  of  the  Associated  Press,  declares 
himself  in  harmony  with  this  stupendous  senti 
ment.  "There  may  have  been  many  Americans 
with  as  high  aspirations,"  comments  Mr.  Noyes, 
"but  it  seems  to  me  that  no  American  has  been 
able  to  make  his  aspirations  realities  as  did  he." 

"Beyond  all  possibility  of  reasonable  contro 
versy,"  rules  ex-United  States  Senator  Albert  J. 

27 


(greatest  American 

Beveridge  of  Indiana,  "the  greatest  man  this 
country  has  produced  and,  as  I  think,  the  greatest 
the  world  has  produced — excepting,  of  course, 
Jesus  Christ — is  George  Washington."  Ex-Sena 
tor  Beveridge's  opinion  is  particularly  pertinent 
because  he  is  fresh  from  an  exhaustive  study  of 
American  history  incidental  to  his  recent  produc 
tion  of  a  marvelously  valuable  portrayal  of  the 
life  and  services  of  John  Marshall.  ' '  Our  history, ' ' 
says  Beveridge,  "  shows  that  the  American  people 
are  fecund  in  the  production  of  leaders;  but  this 
is  not  a  steady,  continuous  phenomenon.  On  the 
contrary,  our  production  of  great  leaders  has  gone 
by  periods — by  waves,  as  it  were.  It  is  not  true 
that  there  are  as  great  men  at  all  times  as  there 
are  at  particular  times.  This  subject,  like  every 
thing  else,  seems  to  be  controlled  by  the  rhythmic 
theory  of  the  universe.  There  are  distinct  periods 
when  leadership  sinks  appallingly;  while  at  other 
periods  super-eminent  men  appear  among  us." 

Congressman  Frederick  H.  Gillett  of  Massa 
chusetts,  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Representatives, 
joins  in  declaring  Washington  the  greatest  Ameri 
can:  and  ex-Speaker  Champ  Clark  of  Missouri 
goes  further  to  declare  Washington  "the  greatest 
man  that  ever  lived." 

28 


<©reate£t  American 

Colonel  F.  W.  Galbraith  of  Cincinnati,  at  present 
National  Commander  of  The  American  Legion, 
contents  himself  with  one  single  word — "  Washing 
ton" — when  interrogated  upon  this  interesting 
subject.  But  one  word  alone,  in  such  circum 
stances,  is  eloquent.  For  modern  Americans  who 
rate  Washington  first  upon  the  nation's  scrolls  of 
fame,  the  whole  story  was  summed  in  the  phrase 
through  which  the  Senate  communicated  its  grief 
to  President  Adams  when  the  news  of  Washing 
ton's  death  broke  upon  the  Capitol.  "On  this 
occasion  it  is  manly  to  weep.  Our  country  mourns 
her  Father.  The  Almighty  Disposer  of  Human 
Events  has  taken  from  us  our  greatest  benefactor 
and  ornament.  Ancient  and  modern  names  are 
diminished  before  him.  The  destroyers  of  na 
tions  stood  abashed  at  the  majesty  of  his  virtue. 
Let  them  (his  countrymen)  teach  their  children 
never  to  forget  that  the  fruit  of  his  labors  and  his 
example  are  their  inheritance." 

Judge  Alton  B.  Parker  of  New  York,  Demo 
cratic  nominee  for  President  of  the  United  States 
in  1904,  says:  "My  greatest  American  is  the  man 
who  was  first  in  the  war  for  independence;  the  first 
and  only  choice  for  the  Presidency  of  the  Conven 
tion  which  formulated  the  Constitution;  and  the 

29 


(greatest  American 

first  choice  of  all  the  people  for  President  of  the 
United  States.  Without  his  great  leadership  in 
the  war,  our  independence  might  not  have  been 
gained;  without  his  steadying  influence,  the  Con 
vention  might  not  have  agreed  upon  the  form  of 
the  Constitution;  and  without  his  stabilizing  au 
thority,  as  President  of  the  United  States  for  two 
terms,  the  Constitution  might  have  foundered 
upon  the  political  rocks  which  menaced  it." 

Mr.  James  M.  Beck,  distinguished  lawyer  and 
publicist  of  New  York,  first  pays  tribute  to  Ben 
jamin  Franklin's  tremendous  intellectuality,  then 
adds:  "Greatness,  however,  consists  of  something 
more  than  mere  intellectual  attainments.  In 
measuring  the  relative  greatness  of  men,  we  must 
have  regard  to  the  intellectual,  the  physical  and 
the  spiritual  elements  in  human  character.  So 
considered,  it  seems  to  me  that  George  Washing 
ton  is  incomparably  the  greatest  of  all  Americans, 
and  this  judgment  seems  confirmed  by  that  which 
someone  finely  called,  'the  arduous  greatness  of 
things  done/' 

Dr.  Lyon  G.  Tyler  of  Virginia,  President  Emeri 
tus  of  William  and  Mary  College,  is  particularly 
vehement  in  his  views  related  to  this  concern.  "It 
surprises  me  beyond  anything,"  he  says,  "that  you 

30 


(greatest  American 


should  think  it  necessary  to  put  such  a  question  as 
who  is  entitled  to  be  called  *  the  greatest  American,' 
or  that  there  should  be  any  hesitation  on  the  part 
of  any  person  in  awarding  this  distinction.  The 
idea  of  any  name  disputing  with  George  Washing 
ton  the  honor  of  this  distinction  passes  my  compre 
hension.  Without  him,  this  country  as  a  nation 
would  never  have  had  any  existence.  It  was 
entirely  due  to  his  immense  moral  force  that  the 
States  were  kept  together  during  the  Revolution 
and  the  war  brought  to  a  successful  conclusion;  and 
it  was  largely  due  to  him  that  the  two  jarring  na 
tions  of  the  North  and  South  did  not  separate 
immediately  after  it.  What  he  accomplished  by 
his  magnificent  moral  power  was  only  accom 
plished  in  1  86  1  in  much  inferior  hands  by  brute 
force.  Never  did  a  figure  so  noble  and  so  grand 
stand  at  the  threshold  of  any  nation  !  Pure  in  his 
private  character,  unselfish  in  his  patriotism, 
supreme  in  his  moral  strength,  majestic  in  his 
personal  appearance,  he  stands  without  any  pos 
sible  rival  the  greatest  American,  if  not  the  greatest 
man  of  all  ages." 

Honorable  Robert  Lansing,  ex-Secretary  of 
State  in  the  Cabinet  of  President  Wilson,  declares 
that  "considering  all  things,  character,  service 


(greatest  American 

and  accomplishment,  George  Washington  is  the 
greatest  American  in  our  history."  United  States 
Senator  Selden  P.  Spencer  of  Missouri  echoes  this 
same  reverential  sentiment;  similarly,  ex-United 
States  Senator  George  E.  Chamberlain  of  Oregon. 

Mr.  Victor  F.  Lawson,  publisher  of  the  Chicago 
Daily  News,  confronting  this  hypothetical  question, 
lists  Washington,  Lincoln  and  Roosevelt.  "Each 
was  the  greatest  in  his  respective  period,"  observes 
Mr.  Lawson.  "Of  the  three — 'Washington  first." 

United  States  Senator  John  Sharp  Williams  of 
Mississippi,  a  congressional  veteran  and  the  au 
thor  of  an  illuminating  work  discussing  The  Per 
manent  Influence  of  Thomas  Jefferson  on  American 
Institutions,  declares  that  Jefferson  was  ' '  the  most 
far-seeing  intellect"  in  the  story  of  the  nation,  but 
that  Washington  "was  the  greatest  man."  Mr. 
Clark  Howell,  Editor  of  the  Atlanta  Constitution, 
Atlanta,  Georgia,  a  representative  southern  journa 
list,  bespeaks  this  same  pre-eminence  for  Wash 
ington  which  seems  so  generally  and  so  profoundly 
prevalent  in  this  area. 

United  States  Senator  Oscar  W.  Underwood  of 
Alabama  says  that  from  his  viewpoint  there  can 
be  but  one  answer  to  the  question;  and  adds:  "I 
do  not  say  this  because  for  a  century  it  has  been 

32 


<§reate#t  American 

customary  to  refer  to  our  first  President  as  the 
foremost  man  in  American  history."  Says  Sena 
tor  Underwood:  "George  Washington  was  not 
the  greatest  statesman,  nor  the  greatest  orator, 
nor  the  greatest  general  in  all  American  history, 
but  as  a  man  ready  to  make  every  personal  sacri 
fice  for  his  country,  always  putting  American 
freedom  above  personal  consideration,  counting 
no  personal  sacrifice  too  great,  for  the  great  re 
sponsibilities  that  rested  upon  him,  regarding  him 
just  as  a  man,  in  my  judgment  he  stands  foremost 
among  all  Americans.  Then,  looking  at  the 
question  from  the  standpoint  of  accomplished 
fact,  for  eight  years  he  held  together  a  ragged 
army,  without  money,  without  supplies,  and  often 
without  arms.  His  character,  his  perseverance 
and  his  generalship  achieved  American  independ 
ence.  Then,  his  patience,  common  sense  and  good 
judgment  enabled  him  to  reconcile  discordant 
elements,  removing  the  conflicts  that  stood  in  the 
way  of  national  life  in  the  new  States,  and  molded 
them  together  under  the  Constitution,  planting 
the  seed  that  was  to  create  the  life  of  the  world's 
greatest  nation.  In  my  judgment,  George  Wash 
ington  stands  without  rival  as  our  greatest 
American." 

3  33 


(greatest  American 

Governor  William  C.  Sproul  of  Pennsylvania 
contributes  the  opinion  that  Washington  stands 
pre-eminent  as  the  greatest  American.  ' '  His  forti 
tude,  his  wisdom  and  his  character  made  a  wonder 
ful  combination,  and  things  which  he  did,  it  seems 
to  me,  'made  other  Americans  possible/ ' 

President  Walter  Dill  Scott  of  Northwestern 
University,  Illinois,  puts  Washington  at  the  head 
of  his  favor;  but  adds,  of  course  correctly,  that 
there  is  no  adequate  standard  of  measurement  at 
the  present  time. 

Lyman  J.  Gage  of  San  Diego,  California,  the 
clear-eyed  and  keen-minded  octogenarian  who 
served  with  distinction  as  Secretary  of  the  Treas 
ury  in  the  Cabinets  of  Presidents  McKinley  and 
Roosevelt,  rates  Washington  as  the  greatest 
American.  ' '  Without  him, ' '  observes  Gage,  ' '  there 
might  not  have  been  an  America.  He  was  an 
aristocrat  by  instinct  and  environment,  but  a 
great  democratic  patriot  by  practice  and  by  the 
immortal  achievements  of  a  singularly  pure  and 
exalted  career/*  Mr.  Gage  pays  sturdy  incidental 
tribute,  however,  in  his  estimate,  to  the  memory  of 
Alexander  Hamilton,  as  is  natural  in  the  case  of  a 
man  who  has  served  the  Treasury  Department  as 
did  he.  "The  success  of  Washington's  actual 

34 


QDfje  (greatest  American 

administration  as  first  President  of  the  United 
States  hung  largely  upon  the  Treasury/*  Gage 
declares,  "and  the  genius  of  Hamilton,  who 
founded  the  Treasury  and  the  public  credit  of  the 
United  States,  is  not  to  be  ignored  in  assessing 
credits  to  those  who  functioned  at  the  govern 
ment's  birth." 

Another  prominent  Westerner,  President  Henry 
Suzzallo  of  the  University  of  Washington  in 
Seattle,  nominates  Washington.  "His  character 
and  personality  unite  more  of  the  qualities  which 
characterize  the  American  soul  than  those  pos 
sessed  by  others,"  declares  this  educator.  "His 
policies  incorporate  more  the  principles  which 
are  fundamental  to  our  society  and  government 
than  the  policies  of  any  other  great  American 
leaders." 

"  I  do  not  think  there  is  any  doubt,  when  every 
thing  is  considered,  that  the  world  regards  George 
Washington  as  the  greatest  man  in  history,"  says 
ex-Secretary  of  the  Navy  Josephus  Daniels  of 
North  Carolina.  "Of  course,  there  were  other 
men  who  in  any  one  line  of  endeavor  or  in  any 
particular  intellectual  achievement  surpassed  him. 
Jefferson  far  surpassed  him  in  conception  of  popu 
lar  government,  and  many  others  in  the  lines  to 

35 


(greatest  American 

which  they  devoted  themselves.  But  in  poise,  in 
breadth,  in  welding  together  the  different  elements 
which  worked  together  to  establish  the  Republic 
and  guide  it  safely  through  the  stormy  seas  of  its 
early  voyage  and  give  it  impetus  and  permanence 
and  stability  and  greatness,  Washington's  name 
leads  all  the  rest." 

Ex-Secretary  of  War  Newton  D.  Baker  of  Ohio 
joins  his  former  colleague  in  the  Wilson  Cabinet 
in  naming  Washington  the  greatest  American. 

Franklin  D.  Roosevelt,  Assistant  Secretary  of 
the  Navy  throughout  the  World  War  and  Demo 
cratic  candidate  for  Vice-President  in  1920,  bases 
his  estimate  upon  a  consideration  of  epochs. 
"After  considerable  thought,"  says  he,  "I  have 
eliminated  the  names  of  all  who  belong  in  what 
might  be  called  the  modern  period  on  the  ground 
that  the  history  of  themselves  and  their  period  can 
not  yet  be  considered  final.  This  would  eliminate 
the  great  names  from  1850  on.  In  the  prior  period 
it  seems  to  me  that  the  name  of  Washington  must, 
all  things  considered,  be  given  first  place." 

Ex-Secretary  of  the  Treasury  Leslie  M.  Shaw, 
formerly  of  Iowa  and  now  of  Washington,  interest 
ingly  says:  "Assuming  that  the  difference  between 
a  big  man  and  a  little  man  is  that  the  former  does 

36 


(greatest  American 

not  make  a  fool  of  himself  all  of  the  time,  and  that 
great  men  should  be  graded  in  inverse  ratio  to  the 
frequency  in  which  they  limp,  I  am  compelled  to 
nominate  Washington  as  the  greatest  American. 
As  between  him  and  Lincoln,  it  is  hard  to  distin 
guish.  Perhaps  distance  has  eliminated  errors 
and  left  visible  only  the  mountain  peaks  of 
greatness  in  each  of  these." 

President  Edwin  A.  Alderman  of  the  Univer 
sity  of  Virginia  nominates  George  Washington. 
"Character  is  greater  than  genius,"  he  argues, 
"and,  by  the  sheer  moral  grandeur  of  his  character, 
Washington  achieved  a  place  among  the  supreme 
figures  in  the  annals  of  our  race.  He  is  a  great 
illuminating  allegory,  in  fact,  of  unselfishness,  vast 
common  sense,  correct  vision  of  a  justly  ordered 
modern  state,  patience,  self-control  and  integrity. 
He  has  become  the  apostle  to  all  later  ages  of  the 
high  doctrine  that  immortal  fame  and  immeasur 
able  service  may  be  rendered  to  mankind  more 
enduringly  by  integrity  and  the  quiet  virtues  than 
by  superhuman  gifts.  If  I  were  asked,  I  may  add, 
to  name  the  most  beautiful,  the  most  appealing, 
the  most  flawless  character  in  our  life,  combining 
in  a  noble  symmetry  strength  and  virtue,  I  should 
name  another  Virginian,  Robert  E.  Lee." 

37 


(greatest  American 

Ex-United  States  Senator  John  W.  Weeks  of 
Massachusetts  argues  that  "if  it  had  not  been  for 
George  Washington  we  might  not  have  achieved 
our  independence  at  the  time  we  did  and  perhaps 
never  as  completely  as  resulted  from  the  Revolu 
tion.  If  it  had  not  been  for  his  sound  judgment, 
we  probably  could  not  have  organized  the  form  of 
government  which  has  been  so  beneficial  to  us  and 
the  whole  world ;  and,  while  he  was  not  in  any  sense 
a  brilliant  man,  he  was  able  to  steer  the  country 
clear  of  all  shoals  during  its  formative  period,  and 
for  that  reason,  in  my  opinion,  he  is  entitled  to  be 
placed  first  among  American  citizens." 

Cleveland  H.  Dodge  of  New  York,  representa 
tive  of  the  largely  successful  business  men  of 
America  and  prominent  likewise  in  philanthropic 
and  educational  works,  says:  "I  think  the  verdict 
of  history,  and  the  general  consensus  of  the  best 
opinion  of  the  American  people,  are  correct  in 
feeling  that  the  greatest  American  was  George 
Washington.'* 

United  States  Senator  James  A.  Reed  of  Mis 
souri  declares  that  Washington  was  the  greatest 
American,  although  Jefferson  was  "a  close  second." 
"In  the  first  instance,"  argues  Reed,  "it  was 
Washington's  wonderful  organizing  ability  and 

38 


(greatest  American 

sublime  courage  and  patience  which  gained  our 
liberties.  He  then  furnished  two  splendid  ex 
amples.  He  immediately  surrendered  his  military 
authority  and  afterwards  declined  to  be  a  candi 
date  for  a  third  term  as  President.  Upon  the 
other  hand,  Jefferson's  mind  undoubtedly  best 
conceived  the  structure  of  a  Democratic  govern 
ment.  His  marvelous  ability  in  foreseeing  the 
dangers  lying  in  the  future  and  in  guarding  against 
them  entitles  him  to  a  place  as  the  best  construc 
tive  statesman  of  history.  But  I  think,  all  in  all, 
we  owe  the  most  to  Washington." 

Mr.  Frank  I.  Cobb  of  the  New  York  World,  one 
of  America's  leading  contemporary  journalists, 
pleads  the  difficulty  of  deciding  who  is  the  greatest 
American  "because  men  must  be  judged  by  their 
periods.  Inasmuch  as  it  was  Washington  who 
guided  the  country  though  the  Revolution  and  put 
the  Republic  on  its  feet,  I  am  disposed  to  believe 
that  the  title  belongs  to  him  more  than  to  any  other 
man.  But,  of  course,  Jefferson  was  the  great 
American  of  the  period  that  followed.  In  a  way, 
John  Marshall  could  be  called  the  great  American 
of  the  post-Jeffersonian  period,  and  Lincoln,  of 
course,  is  the  great  American  of  the  latter  half  of 
the  nineteenth  century.  Nor  do  I  think  there  is 

39 


(greatest  American 

any  doubt  that  history  will  rank  Wilson  as  the 
greatest  American  of  the  twentieth  century." 

President  Walter  E.  Clark  of  the  University  of 
Nevada,  at  Reno,  declares  the  dual  pre-eminence 
of  Washington  and  Lincoln.  "Choice  between 
them,'*  says  he,  "is  for  me  very  difficult.  Wash 
ington  served  Virginia  conspicuously  for  over 
twenty  years  before  1 774  and  from  that  date  he  was 
the  most  conspicuous  servant  of  all  the  colonies 
for  twenty-five  years.  He  was  notable  as  a  field 
commander  and  as  commander-in-chief  of  all  the 
armies;  as  a  counsellor  in  the  sixteen  years  con 
sultation  prior  to  the  launching  of  the  United  States 
of  America;  as  the  first  President  during  eight 
stressful  and  dangerous  initial  years  and  as  the 
young  Republic's  grand  old  man  during  the  re 
maining  three  years  of  his  life.  Lincoln  was  a 
miracle  man — a  greater  thinker,  a  more  convincing 
debater,  a  far  greater  master  of  English,  and  withal 
gentler,  more  sympathetic,  more  human  than 
Washington.  Lincoln  served  a  far  more  complex 
day.  His  problems  were  massed.  On  the  other 
hand,  his  direct  public  service  period  was  very 
brief,  compared  to  that  of  Washington.  Wash 
ington  was  a  beginner  of  great  things — served 
notably  with  initiative  of  wisest  type  in  a  day  with- 

40 


Greatest  American 


out  precedents;  Lincoln  was  rather  a  preserver. 
I  am  loath  to  nominate  either  of  these  two  pre 
eminent  Americans  for  first  place.  The  service 
to  our  nation  of  each  was  indispensably  great.  If, 
however,  I  must  rank  them,  I  shall  name  Wash 
ington  as  first  and  Lincoln  second  only  to  the 
greatest  of  all  Americans." 

Interesting  testimony  is  now  produced  exter 
nally.  I  asked  Mario  G.  Menocal,  President  of 
the  Republic  of  Cuba  and  a  man  whose  education 
in  the  States  makes  him  peculiarly  familiar  with 
our  history  and  traditions,  to  name  the  greatest 
American  from  his  detached  point  of  view.  "It 
is  hard  to  say  who  among  so  many  illustrious  Ameri 
cans  famous  in  the  history  of  their  country  is 
greatest,"  declares  Menocal.  "  Without  failing  to 
recognize  the  superior  qualities  which  other  histori 
cal  personages  may  possess,  from  certain  de 
termined  points  of  view,  there  is  one  whose  name 
inspires  admiration  and  respect  and  who  appears 
prominently  among  the  many  historical  celebrities 
of  America.  I  refer  to  George  Washington,  the 
guiding  spirit  of  your  great  nation,  and  who,  as 
you  know,  was  first  in  peace,  first  in  war,  and 
first  in  the  hearts  of  his  countrymen,  as  he  is  always 
proclaimed  by  the  American  people." 

41 


(greatest  American 

Lord  James  Bryce  of  England,  long  the  British 
Ambassador  to  the  United  States  and  one  of  the 
most  discerning  analysts  and  historians  who  ever 
studied  and  discussed  American  institutions,  is 
another  formidable  external  witness.  "I  will 
make  answer  in  a  way  which  may  be  thought 
obvious  but  which  represents  a  judgment  long  ago 
formed,"  said  Lord  Bryce  in  answer  to  this  book's 
interrogation.  "George  Washington  is,  take  him 
all  in  all,  the  greatest  figure  in  American  history." 

If  the  quinquennial  balloting  for  eligibility  for 
New  York  University's  "Hall  of  Fame"  is  a 
criterion — and  really  it  amounts  to  an  anonymous 
symposium  of  the  opinions  of  leaders  in  contempo 
rary  American  public  thought  quite  similar  to  that 
which  this  section  of  this  book  reports — Washing 
ton  leads  by  narrow  margin  as  the  greatest  Ameri 
can.  The  largest  number  of  votes  for  place  in  the 
Hall  of  Fame  ever  returned  for  any  American  was 
given  Washington  in  the  initial  referendum.  He 
was  closely  followed  by  Lincoln,  Webster,  Franklin, 
Jefferson  and  Marshall.  Alexander  Hamilton  did 
not  become  eligible  for  the  Hall  of  Fame  under  its 
rules  until  1910,  because  of  his  birth  in  the  West 
Indies.  In  the  1910  referendum  he  led  all  other 
Americans  for  recognition. 

42 


MANY  prominent  citizens  have  told  me  that  the 
elevation  of  any  one  American  to  super-eminence 
is  impossible.  Thus  President  Harry  Pratt  Judson 
of  the  University  of  Chicago  insists  that  an  intelli 
gent  answer  to  this  question  is  impossible:  first, 
because  greatness  is  a  relative  matter;  second,  be 
cause  it  applies  to  lines  of  life  of  a  great  variety. 
I  confess  that  this  is  largely  true  as  a  problem  in 
literal  construction.  President  W.  H.  P.  Faunce 
of  Brown  University,  Rhode  Island,  similarly  in 
sists  that  too  much  depends  upon  the  definition 
of ' '  greatness. "  "  It  is  somewhat  like  asking  which 
is  the  most  beautiful  flower  or  which  the  best 
country  to  live  in;  I  do  not  think  an  answer 
is  possible,"  declares  President  Faunce.  Rear 
Admiral  William  S.  Sims  similarly  protests  that 
"intelligent  answer"  is  impossible  for  the  reason 
that  greatness  comprises  so  many  different  quali 
ties.  President  Stratton  D.  Brooks  of  Oklahoma 
University  says  that  "there  is  no  man  entitled  to 

43 


<§reate#t  American 

be  called  the  greatest  American."  Ex-President 
William  Howard  Taft  insists  that  an  opinion  is 
impossible,  "first,  because  it  is  a  question  of  defini 
tion  upon  which  there  is  a  great  difference,  and, 
second,  because  there  might  be  difference  as  to  the 
facts,  and,  on  the  whole,  as  to  the  merits. "  Presi 
dent  Arthur  T.  Hadley  of  Yale  University  says  that 
"no  one  man  stands  out  so  pre-eminently  above 
all  others  that  I  should  venture  to  select  him  as  the 
greatest  American."  \peorge  B.  Cortelyou  of  New 
York,  whose  long  public  work  comprehends  closest 
relationships  with  three  Presidents,  Cleveland, 
McKinley  and  Roosevelt,  takes  this  same  view, 
insisting  that  "there  is  no  common  basis  of  com 
parison."  So,  too,  E.  W.  Scripps  of  California, 
connected  with  twenty-two  great  American  news 
papers  and  utterly  keen  in  his  perceptions,  insists 
that  there  is  no  greatest  American.  He  argues 
that  our  national  achievements  are  a  composite 
product  to  which  the  most  radically  opposite  men 
and  views  may  have  made  a  common  contribu 
tion.  Thus  he  maintains  that  the  evolution  of  our 
institutions  required  the  clash  between  Hamil- 
tonianism  and  Jeffersonianism  in  order  to  chal 
lenge  the  best  advantage  from  each — one  a  foil 
for  the  other — both  equally  essential.  For  all  of 

44 


<§reatest  American 


these  conservative  judgments  there  can  be  easy 
vindication. 

On  the  other  hand,  many  prominent  citizens  are 
content  to  bracket  their  first  favorites  and  let  a 
plural  answer  bespeak  their  beliefs  that  there  is 
no  one  greatest  American.  Thus  Vice-President 
Calvin  Coolidge  rests  his  undivided  verdict  between 
Washington  and  Lincoln. 

Major  General  Leonard  Wood,  contending  that 
"various  men  have  done  great  work  in  different 
fields  of  activity,'*  crowns  a  trinity  of  great 
Americans  —  Washington,  Lincoln  and  Roosevelt. 

Dr.  Henry  Van  Dyke,  eminent  editor,  author, 
scholar,  diplomat  and  theologian  of  Princeton,  says: 
"If  you  mean  to  ask  who  was  the  greatest  man 
among  great  Americans,  my  answer  would  be 
Washington;  if  you  mean  to  ask  who  was  the 
most  distinctively  American  man  among  great 
Americans,  my  answer  would  be  Lincoln." 

Professor  James  Ford  Rhodes,  one  of  the  keenest 
and  most  profound  historical  authorities  in  the 
land,  nominates  both  Washington  and  Lincoln 
and  says:  "It  has  always  been  impossible  for  me  to 
give  either  one  the  precedence.  We  used  to  say, 
George  Washington,  the  Creator  of  the  Nation, 
Abraham  Lincoln,  its  Preserver.  Popular  fa- 

45 


(greatest  American 


vorites  in  time  of  political  or  other  excitement  have 
been  'Washington,  Lincoln  and  Garfield,'  or 
'Washington,  Lincoln  and  Cleveland/  or  'Wash 
ington,  Lincoln  and  Roosevelt,'  or  'Washington, 
Lincoln  and  Wilson/  The  popular  voice  has 
always  been  for  the  first  two  names;  it  changes 
only  for  the  third." 

Stewart  Edward  White,  the  famous  American 
novelist,  follows  one  of  the  foregoing  formulas  and 
rejects  another.  "I  cannot  answer  your  ques 
tion/'  White  replies.  "I  think  our  country  has 
passed  through  several  fundamental  crises,  in  each 
of  which  a  man  has  filled  the  bill  so  completely 
that  he  might  be  considered  as  indispensable. 
Washington  took  care  that  we  came  into  being; 
and  without  his  ability  and  tenacity,  I  do  not 
believe  we  would  have  gained  independence. 
Equally  there  is  no  doubt  in  my  mind  that 
Lincoln  held  us  from  an  otherwise  inevitable  dis 
ruption.  Likewise,  Roosevelt  prevented  our  com 
plete  descent  into  the  sordidness  of  a  materialism 
that  would  have  been  fatal  to  all  our  ideals.  I  can, 
however,  be  definite  in  one  respect.  I  do  not 
include  Mr.  Wilson." 

General  Charles  H.  Taylor,  famous  editor  of  the 
Boston  Globe,  drops  into  a  colloquialism  to  observe 

46 


iSmerican 


that  Washington  and  Lincoln  "fill  the  bill  fifty- 
fifty." 

Federal  Judge  Kenesaw  M.  Landis  of  Illinois 
frankly  confesses  that  between  Washington, 
Franklin  and  Lincoln,  he  cannot  choose  the  greatest 
American. 

United  States  Senator  William  E.  Borah  de 
clares  his  inability  to  determine  a  preference  as 
between  Washington  and  Lincoln.  "If  I  should 
give  you  the  name  of  either,"  says  Senator  Borah, 
"I  would  likely  regret  it  afterwards,  as  I  have 
been  really  unable  to  determine  in  my  own  mind 
which  one,  if  either,  is  entitled  to  be  classed  as  the 
greatest  American.  When  I  think  of  the  stupen 
dous  work  of  Washington  in  creating  a  Republic  — 
the  first  real  Republic  that  ever  existed  —  I  am 
impressed  with  the  fact  that  he  should  have 
supreme  title.  But  when  I  reflect  again  upon  the 
supreme  task  of  Lincoln  in  preserving  that  same 
Republic,  under  conditions  which  never  before 
confronted  a  leader,  I  feel  that  he  should  have  the 
honor.  So  I  am  going  to  leave  it  there.  I  cannot 
do  otherwise  and  be  candid."  Of  Lincoln,  Sena 
tor  Borah  has  said:  "There  was  in  him  a  fullness, 
a  completeness,  a  greatness,  which  seem  to  forbid 
an  attempt  to  accentuate  particular  qualities. 

47 


(greatest  American 


In  the  consideration  of  particular  elements  of 
strength  we  are  soon  lost  in  the  contemplation  of 
his  massive  figure  as  a  whole.  His  life  in  all  its 
wretchedness  and  glory,  in  all  its  penury  and 
power,  intrudes  itself  upon  us  and  seems  as  inex 
plicable  and  incomprehensible  as  the  cunning  of 
Angelo's  chisel  or  the  touch  of  Titian's  brush. 
Sacred  writers,  had  he  lived  in  those  days,  would 
have  placed  him  among  their  seers  and  prophets 
and  invested  him  with  the  hidden  powers  of  the 
mystic  world.  Antiquity  would  have  clothed 
such  a  being  with  the  attributes  of  deity.  He  was 
one  of  the  mortal  and  intellectual  giants  of  the 
earth!"1  On  the  other  hand,  Senator  Borah  has 
said  of  Washington:  "What  is  the  test  of  states 
manship?  Is  it  the  formation  of  theories,  the 
utterance  of  abstract  and  incontrovertible  truths, 
or  is  it  the  capacity  and  the  power  to  give  to  a 
people  that  concrete  thing  called  liberty,  that  vital 
and  indispensable  thing  in  human  happiness  called 
free  institutions  and  to  establish  over  all  and 
above  all  the  blessed  and  eternal  reign  of  order  and 
law?  If  this  be  the  test,  where  shall  we  find  an 
other  whose  name  is  entitled  to  be  written  be- 

1  Address  delivered  at  Lincoln's  birthplace,  November 
9,1911. 

48 


(Greatest  American 


side  the  name  of  Washington?  ...  He  led  the 
Revolutionary  Army  to  victory.  He  was  the  very 
first  to  suggest  a  Union  instead  of  a  Confederacy. 
He  presided  over  and  counseled  with  great  wisdom 
the  convention  which  framed  the  Constitution. 
He  guided  the  government  through  its  first  peril 
ous  years.  He  gave  dignity  and  stability  and 
honor  to  that  which  was  looked  upon  by  the  world 
as  a  passing  experiment,  and  finally,  as  his  own 
peculiar  and  particular  contribution  to  the  hap 
piness  of  his  countrymen  and  to  the  cause  of 
the  Republic,  he  gave  us  his  great  foreign  policy 
under  which  we  have  lived  and  prospered  and 
strengthened  for  nearly  a  century  and  a  half."1 

Honorable  Samuel  M.  McCall  of  Boston,  long 
distinguished  both  as  an  able  statesman  and  as  a 
profound  scholar,  declares  hesitancy  to  pick  the 
greatest  American  for  many  men  have  appar 
ently  been  indispensable  to  the  greatness  and  even 
the  existence  of  the  country.  "We  have  had 
some  very  rich  elements  of  manhood  from  the 
beginning,"  observes  Mr.  McCall,  "some  of  them 
probably  whose  names  are  inconspicuous  if  known 
at  all.  There  has  been  more  than  one  'mute  and 
inglorious  Milton'  or  'Cromwell  guiltless  of  his 

1  Address  in  the  Senate,  November  19,  1919. 
4  49 


&reate*t  American 

country's  blood/  Without  Franklin  we  might 
never  have  got  the  French  Alliance.  Without 
Washington  we  might  never  have  won  the  war. 
Without  Hamilton  we  might  never  have  got  the 
Constitution  made  workable.  Without  Webster 
the  sentiment  of  nationality  might  not  have  been 
built  up  at  the  critical  time  and  become  strong 
enough  to  win  in  the  inevitable  conflict ;  and  with 
out  Lincoln  that  conflict  might  not  have  been  won. 
So  I  hesitate  to  say  who  is  the  greatest  American/' 
So,  too,  Milton  A.  McRae  of  Detroit,  Michigan, 
and  San  Diego,  California,  long  one  of  the  most 
prominent  figures  in  dynamic  American  journalism, 
insists  that  "  there  are  so  many  great  Americans, 
it  would  be  impossible  to  designate  the  great 
est."  Observing  that  in  any  event  an  opinion  is 
not  a  proved  fact,  Mr.  McRae  says  that  "while 
Washington,  Lincoln  and  Roosevelt  were  pre 
eminent  leaders  in  America,  there  were  many 
other  great  Americans. "  However,  Mr.  McRae 
sturdily  endorses  the  fundamental  purpose  of  this 
symposium  as  set  down  in  the  preface,  namely,  to 
stimulate  interest  in  American  history.  "The 
present  generation/'  he  rightly  declares,  "is  so  en 
grossed  in  the  material  things  of  life  that  it  is  lament 
ably  poor  in  the  knowledge  of  American  history 

50 


American 


which  should  furnish  the  richest  and  choicest  food 
for  thought  and  for  human  progress.  Our  history 
proves  beyond  all  doubt  that  America  is  the 
greatest  star  in  the  constellation  of  nations." 

Though  many  of  these  able  thinkers  either  hesi 
tate  to  make  a  definite  choice  between  established 
popular  idols  or  refuse  to  undertake  any  dissec 
tion  at  all,  others  step  outside  the  two  prime  popu 
lar  favorites  for  supreme  eminence  and  cast  their 
favor  elsewhere. 

Extremely  interesting  among  this  latter  class  is 
former  Vice-President  Thomas  R.  Marshall  of 
Indiana.  Confronted  with  the  inquiry  which  is 
the  subject  of  this  study,  Marshall  says: 

''This  is  a  question  that  can  only  be  answered 
from  the  viewpoint  of  the  man  who  makes  the 
reply.  Eliminating  the  relations  of  the  Republic 
to  World  politics  and  constricting  the  answer 
exclusively  to  the  effect  upon  American  internal 
affairs,  I  find  myself,  not  only  from  my  reading 
upon  the  subject,  but  also  from  my  personal  recol 
lection,  strangely  tossed  between  two  opinions  of 
two  men  whom  I  conceive  to  have  been  very  great 
Americans  and  neither  one  of  them  would  perhaps 
be  selected  by  any  other  man  who  had  not  felt  the 
urge  and  touch  for  national  unity  and  national 


(greatest  American 

peace.  When  I  consider  the  situation  of  the 
Republic  at  the  beginning  of  1861,  knowing  the 
personal  following  which  Stephen  A.  Douglas  had 
and  believing  that  had  he  spoken  for  the  South  or 
kept  silent,  Ohio,  Indiana  and  Illinois  would  have 
been  the  storm  center  of  secession,  I  am  inclined 
to  think  that  the  influence  which  he  exercised  by  his 
great  address  at  Chicago,  calling  upon  all  men  who 
believed  in  him  to  stand  by  the  Union,  stamps 
him  as  the  man  who  had  the  most  potent  influence 
in  preserving  the  American  Republic  from  disin 
tegration  and,  therefore,  entitles  him  to  the  dis 
tinction  of  The  Greatest  American.  On  the  other 
hand,  when  I  come  down  to  1876  and  realize  the 
fateful  moments  when  the  electoral  commission 
decided  against  the  claims  of  Samuel  J.  Tilden, 
with  personal  knowledge  upon  my  part  that  had 
Tilden  asked  us  to  we  would  have  grabbed  our 
guns,  gone  to  Washington  and  endeavored  to  seat 
him  regardless  of  the  result  to  the  peace  of  the 
Republic,  I  am  inclined  to  think  that  his  ready 
acquiescence  in  what  I  have  always  believed  to  be 
the  unjust  decision  of  the  commission  stamps  him 
as  a  man  who  loved  his  country  more  than  he  loved 
his  own  personal  preferment.  But  in  reality, 
The  Greatest  American,  from  my  standpoint,  is 

52 


Greatest  American 


multitudinous  in  number.  He  is  the  plain,  every 
day,  unassuming,  God-fearing,  law-obeying  man, 
who  cheerfully  yields  to  constituted  power  all  of 
his  preconceived  notions,  to  the  end  that  neither 
treason,  secession  nor  riot  may  stain  in  the  eyes 
of  other  nations  the  flag  so  many  of  us  love  so 
well." 

Pursuing  this  beautiful,  final  thought  of  the 
former  Vice-President's  a  bit  farther,  it  might  be 
eloquently  maintained  from  this  viewpoint  that 
every  soldier  in  every  war  America  has  ever 
been  forced  to  fight  —  certainly  everyone  of  the 
total  of  462,562  casualties  (figures  furnished  by 
Adjutant  General  Harris,  November  15,  1919), 
which  the  Republic  has  cost  —  is  entitled,  each  in 
dividually  for  himself,  to  be  decorated  as  The 
Greatest  American.  Dr.  David  Jayne  Hill,  emi 
nent  educator  and  diplomat,  now  at  Washington, 
testifies  in  much  this  same  vein.  "I  doubt  if 
anyone  can  answer  your  question  with  precision 
and  perfect  justice,"  he  declares  to  me.  "The 
standard  of  measurement  is  not  intellect,  apparent 
service  which  have  many  motives  or  opportunity. 
I  believe  these  have  been  possessed  in  equal  degree 
by  thousands  of  Americans,  many  of  whom  we 
have  never  heard  of.  Some  of  them  perished  at 

53 


(Sreatetft 

Valley  Forge,  others  on  the  fields  of  Flanders, 
others  in  the  Atlantic.  There  is  no  aristocracy  of 
Americanism.  We  all  know  the  names  of  many  of 
its  exemplars,  but  I  am  sure  whoever  is  the  great 
est  of  them  would  not  like  being  considered  the 
greatest." 

Thomas  Jefferson,  third  President  of  the  United 
States  and  credited  by  some  authorities  as  "the 
most  conspicuous  apostle  of  Democracy  in 
America"1  is  nominated  as  the  greatest  American 
by  ex-Governor  James  M.  Cox  of  Ohio,  Democratic 
candidate  for  President  in  the  elections  of  1920. 
Jefferson  unquestionably  was  a  towering  figure  .in 
his  time  and  made  many  notable  contributions  to 
the  history  of  his  country.  He  was  an  ardent 
patriot  in  the  days  when  the  spirit  of  the  Revolu 
tion  was  crystallizing  and  had  a  large  responsi 
bility,  in  a  committee  upon  which  he  served  with 
Franklin,  Adams,  Sherman  and  Livingston,  for 
the  text  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  the 
most  famous  charter  of  liberty  in  the  history  of  the 
world.  After  honorable  service  as  Ambassador  to 
France,  Jefferson  sat  in  Washington's  first  Cabi 
net  as  Secretary  of  State.  He  was  a  strong  be 
liever  in  State  sovereignty  and  decentralization  of 

1  Encyclopedia  Britannica. 

54 


Greatest  American 


public  authority  —  the  antithesis  of  Hamilton. 
His  conflicts  with  Hamilton  upon  these  scores 
manifestly  prejudice  his  standing  in  the  eyes  of  any 
historical  juror  who  finds  first  eminence  for  Jeffer 
son's  persistent  historical  foe.  He  was  twice 
elected  President  and  refused  to  stand  for  a  third 
term  though  pressed  to  do  so  by  the  legislatures  of 
five  States.  His  greatest  achievement  in  states 
manship  was  his  negotiation  of  the  famous  Louisi 
ana  purchase.  His  greatest  impress  upon  history 
is  in  the  r61e  of  exaggerated  democracy.  It  is  a 
familiar  legend  that  his  dress  was  "of  plain  clothe  " 
on  the  day  of  his  inauguration  ;  and  that  he  rode  to 
the  Capital  on  horseback,  alone  and  unattended, 
dismounted  without  assistance  and  hitched  his 
horse  to  a  fence.  This  atmosphere  he  carried  to 
the  last  possible  extreme  in  all  his  public  works 
and  private  manifestations.  He  eschewed  all 
titles.  Even  "Mr."  was  distasteful  to  him.  Cer 
tainly  in  these  respects  he  was  unique  among  all 
great  Americans.  Certainly,  too,  in  many  respects 
he  was  a  genius,  not  the  least  of  these  respects 
being  his  canny  sense  of  political  mass-appeal. 
Certainly  he  was  our  first  great  "Commoner" 
in  every  literal  application  of  that  word.  But 
that  he  was  the  greatest  American,  Governor  Cox 

55 


€fje  <§reate#t  American 

alone  in  this  symposium  contends,  although  Jeffer 
son's  name  is  prominently  and  honorably  men 
tioned  by  several  others  as  previously  reported. 

"It  is  not  an  easy  thing  to  arrive  at  a  decision," 
Cox  observes  in  responding  to  interrogation. 
"Washington  rendered  a  wonderful  service,  yet 
he  was  not  the  specialized  genius  that  Jefferson  was. 
Jackson  was  a  rare  combination  of  common  sense, 
rugged  integrity  and  courage.  He  was  made  for 
his  time,  but  he  was  not  the  great  human  intelli 
gence  that  Jefferson  was.  Lincoln  stands  out  al 
most  incomparable  in  history — in  fact,  he  is  one  of 
the  greatest  characters  in  all  human  history.  But 
it  must  be  remembered  that  the  genius  of  this  re 
public  consists  in  its  democracy.  Jefferson  sensed 
it  and  phrased  it  better  than  anyone  in  all  our  his 
tory.  You  find  the  impress  of  his  deep  convictions 
on  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  and  other 
works  which  came  from  his  hands.  He  was  a  rare 
genius  in  questions  of  government  and  in  establish 
ing  the  relation  between  society  and  government; 
also  in  applying  the  checks  and  balances  of 
government." 

Professor  Charles  M.  Andrews  of  Yale's  faculty 
and  another  of  the  greatest  living  American  his 
torians,  mentions  the  name  of  Theodore  Roosevelt 

56 


<§reategt  American 

alone,  but  with  qualifications.  "I  doubt  if  this 
question  is  capable  of  being  answered/'  says  Pro 
fessor  Andrews,  "for  no  one  can  be  named  who. is 
The  Greatest  American.  Men  are  great  in  certain 
fields  and  among  them  it  is  not  possible  to  select 
any  one  who  deserves  to  be  placed  above  the  others. 
If  you  are  searching  for  the  most  typical  American, 
however,  I  am  inclined  to  think  that  I  should  name 
Roosevelt,  but  I  should  hesitate  a  long  time  before 
I  called  him  The  Greatest  American." 

There  is  no  such  reservation,  however,  in  the 
verdict  returned  by  Henry  C.  Wallace  of  Des 
Moines,  Iowa,  one  of  the  nation's  leaders  in  agri 
cultural  journalism.  "I  say  without  hesitation," 
declares  Mr.  Wallace,  "that  in  my  opinion 
Theodore  Roosevelt  is  best  entitled  to  be  called 
The  Greatest  American,  because  he  exemplified  in 
his  own  life  the  qualities  we  value  most  in  an 
American  citizen." 

Gifford  Pinchot  of  Pennsylvania  says  that 
Washington,  Lincoln  and  Roosevelt  are  the  three 
men  among  whom  The  Greatest  American  must  be 
chosen.  "I  believe,"  he  argues,  "that  Roosevelt 
could  have  done  everything  Washington  did  and  a 
good  many  things  that  Washington  could  not  have 
done.  That  leaves  Lincoln  and  Roosevelt.  Be- 

57 


(greatest  American 

tween  the  two  I  confess  I  am  in  doubt.  Roose 
velt,  I  think,  could  not  have  played  the  part  that 
Lincoln  did  in  humanizing  the  relations  between 
the  North  and  South.  Lincoln,  I  think,  as  a  pure, 
intellectual  force  did  not  equal  Roosevelt,  nor 
could  he  in  my  judgment  have  grasped  great 
international  problems  with  the  clear  definition 
which  so  remarkably  characterized  Roosevelt's 
mind  in  action.  My  answer  must  be  Lincoln  or 
Roosevelt;  which,  I  do  not  know." 

Roosevelt's  credentials  find  sturdy  endorsement 
in  the  younger  collegiate  mind  of  the  country — if 
a  test  case  may  be  called  typical.  Indeed,  in  this 
respect,  he  stands  second  only  to  Lincoln  in  num 
ber  of  proponents.  Professor  C.  H.  Van  Tyne, 
head  of  the  History  Department  of  the  University 
of  Michigan,  polled  his  class  in  American  history 
upon  this  question  with  the  following  interesting 
result:  Lincoln,  119;  Roosevelt,  57;  Wilson,  18; 
Washington,  10;  Franklin,  4;  Jefferson,  i;  Edison, 
I ;  Marshall,  i ;  Bryan,  i ;  Samuel  Adams,  2.  One 
curious  characteristic  of  this  poll  lies  in  the  fact 
that  only  seventeen  students  out  of  214  voting 
cast  their  decision  back  of  1 860  upon  the  calendars 
of  history.  Does  this  indicate  that,  as  a  nation, 
we  are  ripening  into  "age";  that  we  are  now  old 

58 


<§reate£t  American 


enough  to  have  well-defined  eras;  and  that  the 
generations  of  tomorrow  are  to  feel  a  remoteness 
from  colonial  times  and  the  years  of  the  founda 
tion  which  flings  these  earlier  periods  back  into 
vague  and  musty  tradition  which  is  to  cease  to 
make  a  living  impress  upon  students  of  the  future? 

That  Theodore  Roosevelt  was  a  very  great 
American,  superb  in  his  dynamic  genius  and  in 
his  irresistibly  progressive  power  for  good,  is  an 
axiom  which  requires  neither  proofs  nor  eulogy 
for  the  purposes  of  this  volume  because  the  men 
and  women  of  today  are  still  living  in  intimate 
memories  of  the  man  himself.  Americans  know 
him  out  of  richly  intimate  personal  associations. 
What  the  Old  World  thinks  of  him  may  perhaps 
be  epitomized  by  quoting  General  Robert  George 
Nivelle,  defender  of  Verdun,  at  Roosevelt's  grave.1 
"In  the  name  of  the  French  Republic,  I  offer  this 
wreath  to  the  memory  of  the  Great  American  who 
was  the  foremost  and  most  steadfast  friend  of  the 
Allies/' 

President  Henry  Louis  Smith  of  Washington 
and  Lee  University,  Virginia,  prefaces  his  analysis 
of  the  question  with  the  observation  that  it  is  diffi 
cult  to  define  the  meaning  of  the  word  greatest  as 

1  January  2,  1921,  at  Oyster  Bay,  New  York. 

59 


(greatest  American 

applied  to  a  citizen.  "There  is  the  greatness  of 
one's  intrinsic  character,"  says  President  Smith; 
"The  greatness  due  to  the  circumstances  which 
made  him  the  uppermost  figure  in  some  vast  move 
ment  not  due  to  his  own  efforts,  and  the  greatness 
of  service  to  the  world,  which  may  also  be  due  to 
circumstances  rather  than  to  the  leader  which  the 
circumstances  rather  than  his  own  ability  thrust 
into  prominence.  I  would  say  that  the  four 
greatest  Americans  noted  chronologically  are 
George  Washington,  Abraham  Lincoln,  Robert  E. 
Lee  and  Woodrow  Wilson.  In  the  purity,  sym 
metry  and  moral  elevation  of  their  intrinsic  char 
acters,  I  would  rate  them  Lee,  Washington, 
Lincoln,  Wilson.  In  their  intrinsic  ability  and 
their  service  rendered  the  world,  I  would  probably 
rate  them  Washington,  Wilson,  Lincoln,  Lee.  If 
I  rated  simply  their  service  to  humanity  in  an  hour 
of  great  and  overwhelming  crisis,  I  would  say  that 
Woodrow  Wilson  is  The  Greatest  American,  George 
Washington  the  second,  and  Abraham  Lincoln  the 
third." 

United  States  Senator  George  H.  Moses  of  New 
Hampshire  nominates  Daniel  Webster  as  The 
Greatest  American.  " Webster's  name,"  argues 
the  Senator,  "  rests  not  alone  upon  his  great 

60 


(greatest  American 

oratory,  which  is  as  imperishable  as  that  of 
Demosthenes,  but  upon  his  constructive  work  as  a 
statesman,  both  legislative  and  executive,  and 
upon  the  fact  that  it  was  he  who  by  his  exposition 
of  the  Constitution  made  it  possible  for  this 
country  to  do  its  work.'* 

Oscar  S.  Straus  of  New  York,  widely  known  in 
public  works  which  have  included  responsibilities 
both  as  a  member  of  President  Roosevelt's  cabinet 
and  as  an  Ambassador  in  America's  foreign  service, 
offers  the  unique  suggestion  that  prime  favor 
in  this  quest  belongs  to  "Roger  Williams,  the 
founder  of  Rhode  Island,  the  pioneer  of  religious 
liberty  and  the  first  true  type  of  an  American 
freeman." 

Mr.  Cyrus  H.  K.  Curtis,  eminent  American 
publisher,  nominates  Benjamin  Franklin  as  The 
Greatest  American.  Possibly  the  boasted  gene 
alogy  of  Mr.  Curtis'  Saturday  Evening  Post  bears 
unconscious  influence  upon  his  decision;  or  per 
haps  his  long  residence  in  the  city  and  the  State 
upon  which  Franklin  shed  such  lustre  may  con 
tribute  to  his  predilections.  The  average  Penn- 
sylvanian  is  inevitably  loyal  to  Franklin's  memory. 
Franklin,  however,  cannot  be  dismissed  with 
superficialities.  The  truth  is  that  he  was  superb 

61 


(Greatest  American 

in  a  multitude  of  ways;  and  that  no  record  of 
Great  Americans  can  ever  be  complete  without 
giving  him  the  honored  consideration  which  Mr. 
Curtis'  nomination  challenges.  Self-made  and 
self -cultured,  he  furnished  the  impulse  for  un 
counted  useful  movements  addressed  to  the  com 
mon  weal;  and  his  constructive  contributions  to 
the  emancipation  of  America  lend  dignity  to  any 
other  man's  achievements  with  which  they  may  be 
compared. 

Franklin  was  among  the  vigorous  pioneers  in 
militant  American  journalism.  He  organized  our 
first  circulating  library.  He  initiated  the  move 
ment  which  resulted  in  the  foundation  of  the 
University  of  Pennsylvania.  He  organized  the 
first  police  force  and  fire  department  in  the  col 
onies.  He  was  pre-eminently  the  greatest  natural 
philosopher  of  his  time,  the  first  to  demonstrate 
the  congenity  between  electricity  and  lightning. 
He  was  the  first  American  Edison.  He  was  an 
accomplished  linguist — the  unobtrusive  scholar 
in  superlative  degree.  He  proposed  the  scheme 
of  American  Union  as  early  as  1754  when  arguing 
measures  of  colonial  defense  against  prospective 
war  with  France.  He  was  our  first  colonial  mes 
senger  to  England  to  protest  excesses  flung  upon 

62 


(greatest  American 


our  forebears.  His  interviews  with  Grenville  fore 
cast  the  American  Revolution.  By  the  unsup 
ported  power  of  intellect  and  personality  he 
secured  a  repeal  of  the  infamous  Stamp  Act,  though 
this  British  concession  was  sterilized  by  immedi 
ately  subsequent  repetition  of  exploitation  in  new 
directions.  He  sat  in  the  Continental  Congress 
which  commissioned  George  Washington  to  his 
immortal  tasks.  He  was  the  first  colonial  post 
master-general.  He  was  a  member  of  the  Com 
mittee  of  Five  which  drew  up  the  Declaration  of 
Independence.  He  was  one  of  three  Commis 
sioners  to  visit  the  Court  of  Louis  XVI  where,  by 
the  greatest  feats  in  all  the  history  of  fruitful 
diplomacy,  he  captivated  French  imagination  and 
French  love  and  was  largely  responsible  for  win 
ning  continuous  French  support  which  gave  the 
Colonies  their  greatest  boon.  He  was  one  of  the 
Commissioners  to  execute  the  final  British  peace. 
He  was  an  influential  and  ingenious  member  of 
the  Constitutional  Convention.  He  organized  and 
was  the  original  President  of  the  first  society  ever 
formed  in  America  to  advocate  the  abolition  of 
slavery  and  penned  the  first  protest  on  this  sub 
ject  ever  addressed  to  Congress.  No  mere  para 
graph  can  do  justice  to  his  superlative  attainments. 

63 


<§reate£t  American 


His  fame  was  as  wide  as  the  civilized  world  when 
he  died  in  the  ripeness  of  eighty-five  beneficent 
years;  and  posterity  has  multiplied  his  honors. 
No  American  is  better  entitled  to  a  place  in  such  a 
symposium  as  this  work  presents.  Suffice  it  to 
say,  in  a  word,  that  any  man  who  deserves  to 
supersede  him  as  "The  Greatest  American"  must 
indeed  be  very  great. 

Franklin  has  been  highly  mentioned  in  preceding 
chapters  by  gentlemen  who  finally  give  their  first 
favor  elsewhere.  But  the  judgment  of  Mr.  Curtis 
is  directly  endorsed  by  the  president  of  a  prominent 
Southern  university  who  says  —  "taking  every 
thing  into  consideration  I  believe  that  Benjamin 
Franklin  is  The  Greatest  American  "•  —and  adds  a 
request  that  he  be  not  directly  quoted  by  name 
"because  I  am  aware  that  this  judgment  will  seem 
singular  to  many  of  my  friends  from  the  South." 


64 


PART  TWO 


The  Hamilton  Coat-of-Arms 


Hamilton 

Sntrobuction 

WHAT  man  in  the  whole  story  of  the  nation 
down  to  date,  is  best  entitled,  all  things  considered, 
to  be  called  "The  Greatest  American"? 

The  preceding  symposium  reflects  a  profound 
trend  of  seasoned  opinion  in  two  well-defined  direc 
tions.  But  the  very  difference  of  opinion  existing 
between  these  two  schools — the  Lincolnian  and 
the  Washingtonian — proves  the  propriety  of  free 
thought  on  the  subject  and  justifies  the  extension 
of  that  freedom  into  a  wider  selection. 

Citizens  who  make  bold  to  disagree  with  these 
major  trends  must  be  acquitted  of  any  lack  of 
reverence  and  affection  for  the  two  great  Ameri 
cans  who  so  largely  monopolize  first  favor.  There 
is  utterly  no  element  of  disrespect  for  the  mirific 
inheritances  left  us  in  the  lives  of  The  Father  and 
The  Saviour  of  their  country,  in  opinions  which 
turn  elsewhere  with  their  paramount  acknowl- 

67 


(greatest  American 

edgments.  The  act  of  nominating  some  other 
" Greatest  American"  is  no  more  an  heresy  than 
the  act  of  refusing  to  nominate  any  one  at  all.  We 
have  been  blessed  with  a  wealth  of  great  Ameri 
cans.  For  all  of  them,  modern  generations  and 
their  posterity  must  always  be  prodigal  with 
gratitude.  The  marvel  is  that  there  should  be  any 
concentrated  verdict  at  all  in  such  a  calendar  and 
such  a  story.  That  a  minority  should  stress  the 
claims  upon  pre-eminence  of  other  great  Americans 
is  fundamentally  a  compliment  to  the  fecundity  of 
American  genius.  From  still  another  viewpoint, 
it  but  emphasizes  the  tremendous  power  and  glory 
of  Washington  and  Lincoln  by  demonstrating  the 
historical  competition  that  has  had  to  be  overcome 
before  these  first  favorites  of  the  majority  could 
reach  their  pinnacles  in  the  perspective  of  the 
modern  day. 

I  join  this  minority,  with  its  Franklin  and  its 
Jefferson,  its  Stephens  and  its  Tilden,  its  Wil 
liams  and  its  Webster,  its  Roosevelt  and  its  Wilson; 
but  I  join  it  to  challenge  the  attention  of  America 
to  the  First  Friend  of  her  youth,  the  man  who 
made  a  more  diversified  contribution  of  indis 
pensable  services  to  the  American  Republic  than 
any  other  patriot  before  or  since.  I  join  it  to 

68 


<§reate£t  American 

^\ 

nominate  the  Master  Builder  of  indissoluble  Union, 

the  Gladiator  who  saved  the  Constitution,  the 
Founder  of  American  Public  Credit,  the  Architect 
of  Policies  and  Institutions,  the  inspired  Oracle  of 
sound  American  Purpose  and  Necessity,  the  In 
trepid  Soldier,  the  Great  Economist,  the  Most 
Brilliant  Author,  the  most  Fascinating  Orator 
and  the  Most  Formidable  Legal  Luminary  of  his 
time.'^I  join  this  minority  to  nominate  the  in 
dubitable  genius  whom  a  forgetful  posterity  all  but 
ignores  in  its  casual  calculations,  yet  to  whom 
it  owes  so  great  a  debt  that  neither  marbles 
nor  granites  nor  eulogies  could  begin  to  strike 
a  balance.  I  join  it  to  nominate  Alexander 
Hamilton  as  the  man  who,  all  things  considered, 
is  entitled  to  be  called  "The  Greatest  Ameri 
can":  and,  to  this  end,  I  beg  leave  to  submit  my 
proofs. 

In  my  canvass  of  the  nation's  thought,  reported 
heretofore,  I  interviewed  Hamilton's  two  greatest 
living  biographers.  When  confronted  with  my 
question,  shorn  of  any  inkling  as  to  my  interroga 
tion's  purpose,  Gertrude  Atherton  promptly  de 
clared  that  Hamilton  is  entitled  to  the  pre-eminence 
which  this  volume  undertakes  to  establish.  She 
could  not  have  sensed  the  compelling  drama  of  his 

69 


(greatest  American 


life  as  beautifully  and  as  eloquently  as  she  has 
done  without  leaving  this  reflex  upon  her  soul. 
Thus  does  woman's  intuition  once  more  vindicate 
itself.  Senator  Lodge  declared  that  there  is  no 
"Greatest  American."  However,  he  pronounced 
Hamilton  "the  greatest  constructive  states 
man"  in  the  story  of  the  world  —  and  such  an 
estimate  from  such  high  source  is  an  extreme  in 
compliment. 

Just  one  citizen,  in  the  wider  field  of  the  nation 
at  large,  came  to  the  symposium  with  the  name  of 
Hamilton  upon  his  lips  as  the  exclusive  answer  to 
my  question.  This  man  was  Myron  T.  Herrick, 
ex-Governor  of  Ohio  and  Ambassador  to  France. 
Says  Herrick: 

"Washington,  of  course,  stands  as  the  Father  of 
his  country.  But  his  great  accomplishments  were 
possible  largely  through  the  constructive  ability 
of  Alexander  Hamilton.  The  conception  of  repre 
sentative  government  presented  by  Hamilton  was 
the  frame-work  of  the  Republic.  The  victories 
won  by  Washington  could  not  have  been  perpetu 
ated  in  the  Republic  but  for  the,  at  the  time, 
unparalleled  genius  of  Hamilton.  Then  again, 
the  form  of  government  as  framed  by  Hamilton 
could  not  have  been  'carried  through*  but  for 

70 


(greatest- American 

the  genius  of  John  Marshall  whose  decisions  made 
the  Constitution.  But  for  the  strength  of  such 
men,  men  of  great  ability — like  Jefferson — would 
have  destroyed  that  government  in  their  partisan 
zeal  and  lack  of  comprehension.  Then  another 
crisis  came,  and  the  nation  was  unquestionably 
saved  from  division  and  the  Republic  perpetuated 
by  Abraham  Lincoln.  I  think  it  is  almost  impos 
sible  to  select  one  man  and  say  that  he  is  the  genius 
—The  Greatest  American — because  it  was  the 
combination  of  these  men  of  genius,  who  laid  aside 
all  self-interest  for  the  purpose  of  creating  a 
Nation.  But  glancing  back  over  this  galaxy, 
possibly  the  first  man  who  occurs  to  me,  responsi 
ble  more  than  anyone  else  for  the  greatness  of  our 
Nation,  is  the  man  with  the  great  creative  genius- 
Alexander  Hamilton." 

Some  others  have  included  Hamilton  on  their 
incidental  rolls.  But  so  far  as  this  symposium  has 
gone,  he  is  conspicuous  chiefly  by  his  absence.  This 
but  emphasizes  our  tragic  historical  forgetfulness, 
as  a  race;  it  but  corroborates  my  foreword's  charge 
that  we  owe  Hamilton's  memory  an  unrequited 
debt ;  and  it  but  whets  the  zeal  for  exhibits,  argu 
ments  and  conclusions  to  justify  the  basis  of  this 
challenge. 


(greatest  American 


"Persons  in  great  stations,"  said  Addison,  "have 
seldom  their  true  character  drawn  till  several 
years  after  their  death.  Their  personal  friendships 
and  enmities  must  cease,  and  the  parties  they  were 
engaged  in  be  at  an  end,  before  their  faults  or  their 
virtues  can  have  justice  done  them.  When  writers 
have  the  least  opportunities  of  knowing  the  truth, 
they  are  in  the  best  disposition  to  tell  it."  It  will 
be  a  happy  benediction  on  this  work,  if  an  approxi 
mation  of  Addison's  verdict  may  be  its  final  due. 
There  is  nothing  new  in  it  save  viewpoint  and 
analysis.  It  does  not  pretend  the  ambitious  effort 
of  a  closely  detailed  biography.  It  does,  however, 
purpose  to  illuminate  the  picture  in  a  new  setting 
and  adorn  it  with  a  novel  frame  ;  and  it  does  provide 
an  authenticated  epitome  of  America's  obligation  to 
this  super-genius.  To  measure  this  obligation  is 
to  come  closely  into  contact  with  the  whole  story 
of  the  American  foundation.  \To  know  Hamilton 
is  to  know  the  history  of  the  creation  of  the  United 
States.  I  have  undertaken  to  discuss  him  in  rela 
tion  to  his  major  contributions  to  this  history,  and, 
finally,  I  have  summed  up  the  whole  laureation  in 

behalf  of  his  exalted  memory.  \Ham:ltonism  is  to 

\  •„  » 

Americanism  what  sterling  is  to  silver^   For  my 
craftsmanship  I  beg  indulgence;  for  my  subject  I 

72 


<§reate#t  American 


crave  the  perpetuated  veneration  and  intimate 
affection  which  any  nation,  worthy  its  inheritance, 
should  unfailingly  preserve  in  relation  to  its  highest 

benefactors. 

THE  AUTHOR. 


73 


Jf  rom  PtrtJ)  to  29eatfj 

A  QUICK  comprehension  of  Alexander  Hamil 
ton's  epitomized  life  story  is  the  necessary  source 
of  such  an  analysis  as  shall  now  be  undertaken.  In 
briefest  form  the  chronology  is  here  set  down.  In 
all  of  the  great  crises  which  his  fertile  genius  served, 
detailed  study  is  reserved  to  subsequent  chapters 
wherein  his  dissected  functions  are  compiled.  In 
other  words,  this  preliminary  sketch  does  nothing 
more  than  erect  the  unadorned  framework  of  a 
towering  career.  The  completed  structure  may 
be  visioned  only  through  the  final,  composite  pic 
ture  which  embraces  all  the  superlative  handiwork 
which  this  master  artisan  wrought  into  his  life  and 
times.  We  build  here  the  mere  calendar.  Its 
illumination  is  a  later  task.  This  is  the  program, 
scheduling  the  drama's  scenes  and  acts  down  to  its 
tragic  epilogue.  Like  all  programs,  it  is  but  a 
preface.  The  play's  the  thing! 

Alexander  Hamilton  was  born  on  the  Island  of 
Nevis  in  the  West  Indies,  January  1 1 ,  1 757.  Under 

74 


"w     w 


II 

o    J 

C0    g 

~      PH 

a 


u      S 


(greatest  American 

British  allegiance,  in  the  heart  of  the  tropics,  with 
an  inheritance  of  pure  Scotch  blood  from  his  father 
and  sturdy  French  Huguenot  from  his  gifted 
mother,  this  child  of  fortune  entered  a  world  which 
he  was  destined  to  touch  with  a  greater  diversity 
of  influence  in  fewer  years  than  any  man  of  his 
time  or  since.  His  father,  a  total  business  failure, 
passed  out  of  his  life  ere  he  outgrew  his  babyhood. 
His  beautiful  and  talented  mother,  mentor  and 
companion  to  him  in  his  earliest  years,  died  when 
he  was  eleven.  Regarding  this  parentage  there 
has  been  much  wicked  controversy.  In  a  letter  to 
Jefferson  in  1813,  John  Adams  called  Hamilton 
"the  bastard  brat  of  a  Scotch  peddler."1  Adams 
cannot  be  forgiven  such  scurrilous  calumny.  In 
this  respect,  he  permitted  himself  to  be  classified 
with  the  notorious  scandal-monger,  Callender,  who 
dubbed  Hamilton  "the  son  of  the  camp-girl."2  The 
truth  is  clear.  His  father  was  of  the  great  Scotch 
"House  of  Hamilton"  and  his  mother  descended 
directly  from  a  noble  French  Huguenot  family 
which,  after  the  revocation  of  the  Edict  of  Nantes 
by  Louis  XIV,  deserted  its  native  land  rather  than 

1  Historical  Magazine,  July,  1870. 

2  The  Prospect  Before  the  United  States,  by  J.  T.  Callender, 
1800. 

75 


(Sreatetft  American 

betray  its  religion.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  however, 
those  venomous  critics  who  have  flung  deprecatory 
slander  at  the  legitimacy  of  Hamilton's  birth,  think 
ing  thus  to  weaken  the  pedestals  beneath  his  emi 
nence,  have  only  emphasized  his  prodigious  record 
of  -achievement.  If,  in  addition  to  all  the  other 
barriers  he  had  to  overcome,  this  sinister  birth 
mark,  however  false,  barred  his  way,  his  ultimate 
triumphs  pass  from  marvels  to  miracles. 

Maternal  relatives  gave  young  Hamilton  casual 
hospitality  until  1769,  when  he  flung  dependence 
aside  and  went  to  work  in  Nicholas  Cruger's 
general  store  and  counting  house  on  St.  Croix.  The 
boy  of  twelve  had  put  his  hand  to  the  plow,  never 
to  relinquish  it.  The  keen  commercial  sense  which 
later  made  him  America's  pioneer  economist  was 
promptly  demonstrated  by  a  business  precocity 
which  swiftly  brought  him  the  full  burden  of 
Cruger's  affairs.  The  avidity  for  learning  which 
later  made  him  the  scholar  of  the  American  Revolu 
tion  was  as  promptly  demonstrated  by  his  mastery, 
during  infrequent  leisure,  of  Latin,  Greek,  Hebrew 
and  mathematics,  with  Shakespeare,  Milton,  Plato, 
Pope  and  Plutarch  for  his  most  intimate  and 
cherished  companions. 

Bent  on  perfected  education  and  assisted  by 

76 


<§reate#t  American 

admiring  friends  who  sensed  his  embryo  genius, 
Hamilton  shortly  set  sail  for  America,  fully  con 
fident  in  his  own  resources,  but  little  dreaming  of 
the  role  destiny  had  in  store  for  him.  He  landed 
in  Boston  in  October,  1772,  fifteen  years  of  age, 
and  promptly  journeyed  to  New  York,  which  was 
some  day  derisively  to  be  called  "  Hamiltonopolis  " 
in  the  lexicon  of  frustrated,  disgruntled  politicians 
to  whom  the  "  young  West  Indian "  ultimately 
became  as  Nemesis. 

Schooling  commenced  in  Barber's  Grammar 
School,  Elizabethtown,  New  Jersey.  Soon  Hamil 
ton  was  ready  for  college.  Princeton,  his  first 
choice,  required  too  much  regularity  of  progress 
to  permit  of  the  mettlesome  strides  Hamilton  in 
tended.  He  entered  King's  College,  now  Columbia, 
in  the  autumn  of  1773. 

The  prophecy  of  revolution  by  now  lay  upon  his 
adopted  land.  The  boy  of  sixteen  took  the  cause 
of  the  oppressed  colonies  to  heart  with  all  the  inde 
fatigable  zeal  and  incorrigible  enthusiasm  which 
made  his  whole  career  invincible.  On  July  6,  1 774, 
a  stripling  in  years  and  physique,  he  pushed  his 
unbidden  way  to  the  rostrum  at  the  famous  ' '  Meet 
ing  in  The  Fields,"  called  to  impress  the  New  York 
Assembly  with  the  people's  purpose  to  have  their 

-      77 


<§reate$t  American 

State  represented  in  the  First  Continental  Con 
gress;  and  he  so  dominated  the  hour's  appeal 
st  morcescent  monarchy  that  he  marked  him 
self  for  a  leadership  in  Freedom's  forward  march 
which  from  that  moment  down  to  his  untimely 
death  he  never  yielded  up. 

Political  exhortation  in  these  early  days  was 
voiced  largely  through  pamphlets  and  widely  circu 
lated  essays.  Hamilton  found  these  agencies  well 
suited  to  his  homiletic  powers.  Two  vigorous 
Tory  tracts  appeared  following  "The  Meeting  in 
The  Fields'*  and  the  first  session  of  the  Conti 
nental  Congress.  Hamilton  answered  them  in  kind 
and  clinched  a  posture  so  commanding  that  Royal 
ists  offered  futile  bribes  to  win  so  dangerous  an 
adversary  to  the  crown. 

The  drama  soon  moved  out  of  platitudes  and 
into  powder.  Hamilton  was  as  ready  to  fight  as 
he  had  been  to  write.  His  were  no  cloistered  phi 
losophies  which  scorned  to  practice  what  they 
preached.  He  went  eagerly  into  a  volunteer  corps 
of  fervid  patriots  who  proposed  that  Lexington  and 
Concord  and  Bunker  Hill  should  not  have  chal 
lenged  tyranny  in  vain ;  and  soon  he  graduated,  on 
March  14,  1776,  to  the  captaincy  of  New  York's 
first  company  of  artillery.  "From  this  point  his 

78 


tljje  (greatest  American 

career  in  the  American  world  began,"  writes  Pro 
fessor  Sumner  in  his  none  too  friendly  biography.1 
"It  was  a  great  career,  because  it  had  some  per 
vading  ideas,  and  they  were  not  ideas  of  personal 
interest  and  ambition.  He  became  the  repre 
sentative  of  Union  and  energy.  His  admirers 
applauded  him,  and  his  enemies  abused  him,  as  an 
apostle  of  energy  in  government. " 

With  this  gallant  company  of  artillery,  Hamil 
ton  battled  valiantly  through  ten  hard  and  crucial 
months,  only  quitting  the  combat  ranks,  where  he 
displayed  empyreal  courage  and  utter  contempt 
of  personal  safety,  when  General  Washington  won 
his  reluctant  consent  to  the  proposition  that  his 
many-sided  genius  could  bulk  heavier  for  his  coun 
try's  cause  as  Aide  and  Military  Secretary  to  the 
Commander-in-Chief  of  all  the  armies  battling  for 
the  higher  aspirations  of  human-kind.  He  was 
military  confidant  and  trusted  proxy  to  Washing 
ton  for  four  terrific  years,  rendering  a  conspicuous 
service  which  shall  be  set  down  in  later  detail. 
Upon  the  occasion  of  one  crucial  mission  to  Air 
bany,  which  tested  to  the  limit  both  his  diplomacy 
and  his  implacable  determination,  he  met  Miss 

1  Alexander  Hamilton,  by  Professor  William  Graham 
Sumner. 

79 


v 

\ 


(greatest  American 

Betsy  Schuyler,  daughter  of  a  sturdy  and  promi 
nent  patriot  house,  who  became  his  bride  in 
December,  1780,  and  remained  his  cherished  wife 
down  to  the  cruel  ending  of  his  brilliant  days. 
Eight  children  were  born  to  this  happy,  contented 
union  over  a  span  of  twenty  subsequent  years. 
Hamilton's  final  active  military  exploit  was  to 
lead  the  first  assault  at  Yorktown  where  Lord 
Cornwallis  gave  up  his  sword  and  Britain  yielded 
her  American  dominion  forever. 
s,  In  1782,  at  the  age  of  twenty-five,  Hamilton 
began  to  build  his  career  of  civil  and  political 
and  professional  and  economic  triumph.  After 
four  months'  preparation,  hasty  but  profoundly 
thorough,  he  qualified  as  a  lawyer;  and  his  sub 
sequent  dominating  leadership  of  the  American  bar, 
at  a  time  of  prolific  genius,  testified  to  the  super 
lative  character  of  an  intellect  which  could  make  so 
much  out  of  such  scant  advantages .  Offered  a  Com- 
missionership  of  the  French  Loan,  discussed  for 
the  British- American  Peace  Embassy,  he  took  his 
first  public  office  in  June,  1782,  when  Robert  Morris 
appointed  him  Continental  Receiver  of  Taxes  for 
New  York.  His  labors  in  this  capacity  were 
dynamically  prophetic,  but  essentially  futile. 
There  never  was  a  moment  when  he  was  not  years 

80 


<©reatestf  American 

ahead  of  his  dissonant  generation.  Yet,  so  marked 
an  impression  did  he  make  upon  the  New  York 
Legislature  that  in  November  he  was  elected  to 
the  Continental  Congress.  "All  this  brilliant 
array  of  literary,  military  and  professional  triumphs 
had  been  won  by  the  orphan  boy  of  the  distant 
island  of  the  Indian  Seas,  at  twenty-five  years  of 
age,"  one  historian  wrote  of  him  at  this  juncture.1 
"We  question  whether  so  rapid  and  so  brilliant  a 
career  is  presented  by  the  history  of  any  other 
statesman  of  any  age  or  country/' 

In  the  Continental  Congress,  Hamilton  promptly 
was  awarded  that  attention  which  his  power  and  his 
personality  exacted  from  any  environment  which 
his  intellect  chose  to  dominate.  He  found  himself 
in  a  moribund  assembly;  but  he  allowed  no  static 
barriers  to  discourage  his  zeal  or  dilute  his  ideals 
or  shatter  his  immutable  tenacity.  His  greatest 
efforts  immediately  addressed  themselves  to  the 
tottering  Confederation's  debts  and  taxes.  \  He 
led  the  fight  for  an  impost  on  imports  and  particu 
larly  addressed  himself  to  Rhode  Island's  obstinate 
and  menacing  refusal  to  accept  a  plan  which  would 
have  provided  continuing  federal  revenues.  But 

1  Life  and  Times  of  Alexander  Hamilton,  by  Samuel  M. 
Schmucker,  1856. 

6  81 


tt jje  (greatest  american 

his  was  almost  a  lone  voice  seeking  what  he  de 
scribed  as  a  "continental  policy.'*  He  fought  the 
impotence  and  ingratitude  which  disgracefully 
proposed  to  disband  the  Continental  Army  and 
send  home  these  gallant  crusaders  without  so  much 
as  a  pretense  of  providing  for  their  long  arrears  of 
pay.  In  this  posture  he  was  once  more  the  strong 
right  arm  and  the  mouth-piece  of  Washington, 
who,  with  a  sublimity  of  unselfish  courage  which 
was  the  trade-mark  of  his  character,  checked  at 
Newburgh  a  rebellion  of  these  ill-used  troops  which 
easily  could  have  precipitated  ruin  upon  the  bud 
ding  Republic.  Hamilton  strove,  too,  for  the  re 
tention  of  a  moderate  army  as  a  nucleus  for  defense ; 
but  the  weak  and  uncertain  parliament  in  which  he 
sat  confessed  its  own  caliber  and  impotence  by 
reducing  this  force  to  the  astounding  minimum  of 
eighty  mercenaries.  Defeated  in  all  his  aspira 
tions,  save  in  dissuading  Robert  Morris  from 
resignation,  Hamilton  sought  to  have  the  debates 
published  and  the  sessions  opened  to  the  public. 
His  was  the  first  voice  ever  raised  in  behalf  of 
publicity  as  a  governmental  purgative.  He  had 
no  secrets  from  the  people  and  feared  only  the 
machinations  that  secrecy  protected  and  induced. 
But  again  he  was  defeated  and  told  to  go  out  on 
J  82 


QHje  (greatest  American 

the  balcony  and  make  his  speeches  if  he  sought 
a  wider  audience.  The  time  was  rapidly  approach 
ing  when  the  whole  government  would  be  his 
''balcony"  and  the  whole  world  his  pit.  One 
year  in  the  Continental  Congress,  while  barren 
of  tangible  fruits,  steeled  his  conviction  that  the 
future  of  his  beloved  country  hung  upon  a  new  and 
sturdier  Union.  To  this  inevitable  end  he  pro 
posed  to  bide  his  time.  Refusing  earnestly  urged 
re-election  to  a  Congress  which  was  but  an  empty 
shell,  a  hollow  mockery,  he  took  up  his  residence 
in  New  York,  and  in  three  years  of  private  practice 
of  his  avowed  profession,  swept  to  the  unchallenged 
leadership  of  the  American  bar. 

Conditions  in  the  enervated  Confederacy  had 
now  brought  colonial  fortunes  to  their  lowest  ebb. 
Spurned  and  exploited  abroad,  the  States,  con 
sumed  at  home  by  jealousies,  commercial  strifes  and 
suspicious  prides,  were  at  the  mercy  of  disaster. 
"Shay's  Rebellion"  in  Massachusetts  snatched  the 
mask  from  pretense  and  displayed  the  ugly  mien 
of  creeping  anarchy,  even  as  it  disclosed  the  pitiful 
nakedness  of  a  broken  governmental  power.  The 
nearer  a  disease  approaches  to  a  crisis,  the  nearer 
it  approaches  to  a  cure.  In  the  prologue  of  hard 
and  uncertain  experience,  the  stage  was  being  set 

83 


(Greatest  American 

for  the  Master  Unionist  to  marshal  the  forces  that 
were  to  preserve  American  constitutional  liberty 
to  the  ages.  Bowdoin,  in  Massachusetts,  had 
forced  a  resolution  of  instructions  for  a  bettered 
coalition,  but  had  failed  of  their  execution. 
Virginia  and  Maryland,  having  found  reciprocal 
advantage  in  a  commercial  compact,  proposed  a 
general  convention  at  Annapolis  for  an  extension 
of  this  helpful  comity  throughout  the  States.  This 
was  the  opening  wedge.  With  prompt  enthusiasm 
Hamilton  leaped  to  the  invitation  as  to  the  coming, 
of  salvation.  His  little  band  of  stalwart  Conti- 
nentalists  forced  New  York  representation  in  the 
proposed  convention  and  Hamilton  hastened  to 
Annapolis  as  the  authorized  spokesman  of  his. 
Commonwealth.  The  Annapolis  gathering,  lack 
ing  authoritative  scope  in  its  flaccid  credentials, 
could  not  approach  fundamentals  in  its  work;  but 
it  adopted  an  address,  prepared  by  Hamilton, 
which  challenged  the  distraught  country  to  a  frank 
contemplation  of  its  pitiful  demoralization  and 
demanded  another  convention  which  should  be 
attended  by  delegates  with  general  powers.  In 
other  words,  it  organized  the  campaign  which  was 
to  make  America. 

The   Constitutional  Convention,  outgrowth   of 

84 


&mencan 

the  Annapolis  aspirations,  met  in  Philadelphia  and 
started  upon  its  immortal  labors  on  the  25th  of 
May,  1787.  Hamilton  sat  from  New  York,  amid 
a  recalcitrant  delegation  and,  after  playing  a  con 
spicuous  part  in  the  deliberations,  was  the  sole 
New  Yorker  to  affix  his  signature  to  the  final  honor 
roll  which  committed  the  present  Constitution  of 
the  United  States  to  a  blessed  and  grateful  pos 
terity.  But  for  his  lonesome  courage,  what  is  now 
the  greatest  State  in  the  Union  would  have  been 
robbed  of  this  honorable  association. 

Then  came  the  desperate  struggle  for  ratifica 
tion;  and  once  more  came  the  resistless  Hamilton, 
the  hero  of  every  breach,  to  marshal  the  battle- 
lines.  Without  him  history  might  easily  have  taken 
different  and  ominous  trend.  The  detailed  analysis 
elsewhere  in  this  volume  only  approximates  the 
tale.  He  wrote  "The  Federalist,"  the  mightiest 
homily  on  government  ever  issued  from  the  pen 
of  man,  a  series  of  expositions  which  is  still  the 
favorite  recourse  of  bench  and  bar,  at  home  and 
abroad,  in  sounding  the  purpose  and  the  meaning 
of  The  Constitution.  Then  he  won  his  way  into 
the  decisive  New  York  Convention  and,  in  1788, 
by  sheer  magicry  of  masterful  appeal,  turned  a 
hostile  hard-committed  majority  of  twenty-six 

85 


(greatest  American 

J  against  the  Constitution  into  a  ratifying  majority 

of  two.  New  York  was  pivotal  in  the  affairs  of 
the  swaddling  Republic.  New  York  and  Hamilton 
made  America's  great  adventure  possible. 

But  "the  business  of  America's  happiness,"  as 
Hamilton  put  it,  "was  yet  to  be  done."  The 
triumph  of  a  theory  had  now  to  be  vindicated  in 
effective  practice.  Hamilton  was  ready,  as  al 
ways,  for  the  supreme  responsibility.  It  is  no  re 
flection  upon  the  mighty  force  and  character  and 
inestimable  contribution  of  President  Washington, 
elected  in  1789,  to  say  that  the  "supreme responsi 
bility"  fell  to  his  Secretary  of  the  Treasury.  It  is 
merely  a  confession  of  the  fact  that  the  new  govern 
ment  was  to  rise  or  fall,  live  or  die,  as  it  succeeded 
or  failed  to  meet  its  greatest,  pressing,  crucial 
problems  in  federal  finance.  That  Hamilton  de 
serves  well-nigh  exclusive  credit  for  snatching  suc 
cess  from  failure,  is  denied  by  no  truthful  historian. 
He  wrote  the  mighty  messages  which  inspired  the 
whole  original  creation  of  a  practical  governmental 
structure.  Though  his  official  station  involved 
merely  the  Treasury  Department,  which  he  served 
as  its  first  and  greatest  Secretary,  his  fecund  genius 
touched  every  branch  of  the  Great  Experiment 
with  constructive  suggestion  and  resultful  purpose. 

86 


, 

TOje  (greatest  American  j 

With  swift  versatility  he  flung  his  besought  coun 
sels  in  every  needful  direction^u)He  pioneered  in 
finance,  in  political  economy,  inUnterpretive  law. 
To  epitomize  his  omniscient  services,  the  contribu 
tions  of  a  Titan,  would  be  impossible^  He  was 
America's    first    dominating   Administrator.     No 
student  can  do  justice  to  his  honorable  memory 
without  consulting  the  subsequent  analyses  for 
which  this  sketch  affords  only  the  chronology.   Suf 
fice  it  here  to  say  that  he  founded  the  Treasury /f) 
the  t^tjormlb^Tikirig  system,  the  basic  theories ._of  1 
federal  taxation  and  the  currency,  and  erected  all] 
the  essential  machinery  for  these  and  a  multitude  1 
of  other  purposes.  @Ke  enunciated  for  the  first 
time  the  policy  of  tariff  protection,  which  has  since 
lived  in  a  century  and  a  half  of  controvers^and 
the  doctrine  of  " implied  constitutional  powers" 
two  great  doctrines  over  which  major  political  par-      ,  ^ 
ties  have  historically  divided  ever  since,  yet  which 
have  been  firmly  fixed  in  the  generally  accepted 
tenets  of  American  government.  WHe  sounded  the 
first  call  to  a  federal  policy  of  internal  improve 
ments  at  public  expense.     In  a  word,  he  was  the 
torch  of  progress. \  "The  mind  of  the  young  sol 
dier-statesman — who   was  armed   with   a  moral 
dignity   and    earnestness   characteristic   alike   of 

87 


V 

<&reate*t  American 


Puritan  and  Huguenot,  with  an  inborr>  genius  for 
organization,  and  with  special  aptitude  for  eco 
nomics  and  finance  —  went  like  an  arrow  to  the 
heart  of  the  problem  with  which  the  financiers  of 
the  Revolution  were  struggling  in  vain."1  "He 
armed  the  government  with  credit  and  with  a 
productive  revenue,"  wrote  Senator  Lodge  in  i882.2 
'  '  He  won  for  it  the  hearty  good-will  of  the  business 
world;  he  gave  it  a  potent  ally  in  the  national 
bank  ;  by  the  funding  system  and  the  bank  he  drew 
out  and  welded  together,  with  the  strong  influence 
of  pecuniary  interest,  a  powerful  class  which  knew 
no  State  lines;  and  by  his  protective  policy  and 
internal  improvements  he  aimed  to  create  yet  an 
other  vigorous  body  of  supporters,  and  give  the 
government  still  more  strength  and  popularity. 
It  was  a  great  policy,  the  work  of  a  master-mind 
looking  far  into  the  future.  It  was  the  foundation 
of  a  great  party  and  the  corner-stone  from  which 
the  federal  government  was  built." 

Hamilton  now  found  himself  at  the  head  of  a 
definite,  purposeful  American  political  group, 
America's  first  political  party  in  any  sense 

1  Hannis  Taylor  in  The  Origin  and  Growth  of  The  American 
Constitution. 

2  Life  of  Hamilton,  by  Henry  Cabot  Lodge. 

88 


(greatest  American 

approximating  modern  usage.  The  Federalists, 
loosely  held  together  heretofore  by  bonds  of  com 
mon  fidelity  to  the  ideals  of  government  which 
Hamilton  eloquently  preached  in  essays  from  which 
these  Federalists  borrowed  their  name,  were  welded 
together  into  a  close  political  entity  by  the  fraternity 
of  battle.  Washington  was  their  President;  but  A 
Hamilton  was  their  Generalissimo.  No  less  did 
the  conflict  over  Hamilton's  fiscal  policies,  particu 
larly  his  success  in  forcing  the  honorable  assump 
tion  of  the  States*  war  debts,  and  his  emphatic 
conquests  in  the  interests  of  centralized  constitu-  / 
tional  authority,  serve  to  cement  the  Anti-Feder 
alists  into  a  consolidated  group  whose  chief 
inspiration  was  personal  opposition  to  the  one  man 
who  personified  every  victory  fought  and  won  in  be 
half  of  Union  and  the  Constitution.  To  this  group, 
feebly  led  by  the  brilliant  but  vacillating  Madison, 
Thomas  Jefferson  brought  policy  and  direction. 
Slowly,  subtly  and,  at  first,  covertly,  Jefferson 
aligned  hostilities.  He  first  showed  his  hand  in  a 
futile  attack  on  John  Adams;  quickly  profited  by 
this  experience;  saw  the  necessity  of  a  continuing 
public  journal  as  the  vehicle  of  effective  propa 
ganda;  established  a  subservient  editor  in  The  Na 
tional  Gazette;  and  opened  a  bitter  attack,  by  proxy, 

89 


(greatest  American 


on  Hamilton  and  the  Administration.  He 
bombarded  Washington  with  correspondence  dep 
recating  Hamiltonian  policies  until,  stung  by 
these  organized  hostilities,  Washington  set  down 
the  whole  indictment  against  Hamilton  in  writing 
and  sent  it  to  his  First  Friend.  No  conjured  abuse 
or  defamation  had  been  left  undrafted  ;  but  Hamil 
ton  promptly  replied  in  an  unimpassioned  and 
unanswerable  document  which  riddled  his  de 
tractors  and  completely  satisfied  the  great  man 
charged  with  supreme  responsibilities.  Having 
thus  dispatched  the  indictment  with  cold,  imper 
sonal  logic,  Hamilton  flew  at  its  authors  with 
intemperate  fury.  In  a  scorching  crusade,  as 
brilliant  as  it  was  inappropriate  in  a  Minister  of 
State,  he  so  humbled  and  humiliated  his  adver 
saries  that  Washington  had  to  admonish  both 
Jefferson  and  Hamilton  to  desist.  It  was  a  short 
armistice.  Jefferson  and  Madison  soon  renewed 
the  offensive  in  a  direct  effort  to  drive  Hamilton 
from  public  life.  They  questioned  the  integrity 
of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  and  his  fiscal 
policies  through  a  series  of  congressional  inquiries 
which  Hamilton  again  met  with  fearless  candor, 
complete  vindication  for  his  impeccable  integrity, 
and  correspondingly  increased  prestige.  The  com- 

90 


(greatest  American 

pression  of  these  epochal  events  into  colorless 
paragraphs  conveys  poor  idea  of  their  vital  impor 
tance  in  the  evolution  of  American  institutions, 
and  pays  even  poorer  compliment  to  the  burden- 
bearer  who  dared  every  hazard  and  every  circum 
stance  in  bringing  early  fruition  in  this  inspired 
plan  for  government  by  self-determination.  It 
seems  necessary  again  to  say  that  this  condensed 
biography  is  but  the  framework  into  which  subse 
quent  studies  in  this  volume  shall  be  fitted  in  due 
course. 

Foreign  involvements  now  precipitated  crisis 
upon  the  struggling  government  in  new  directions ; 
and  once  more,  with  that  rare  versatility  which 
seemed  equal  to  any  emergency,  Hamilton  became 
both  counselor  and  executive  officer  to  Washing 
ton,  though  these  concerns  were  nominally  in 
the  jurisdiction  of  another  Minister.  Though  our 
official  relations  with  France  were  far  from  satisfac 
tory  at  this  time  and  though  Jefferson  had  failed 
to  secure  a  satisfactory  commercial  treaty  while  at 
Paris,  toward  France  there  was  a  deep  underlying 
sense  of  popular  gratitude  and  affection  which  pro 
duced  a  reflex  of  universal  joy  and  acclaim  when  the 
news  first  came  that  France  had  dethroned  mon 
archy  and  proposed  a  Republic.  The  invitation 

91 


American 


and  the  inclination  to  sympathetic  fraternalism 
was  very  human  and  very  real.  But  as  the  French 
Revolution  graduated  from  red  excess  to  crim 
son  outrage,  saner  minds  in  America  retrenched 
and  enthusiasm  began  to  fade.  Washington  and 
Hamilton  dominated  this  trend.  But  as  this 
group  cooled,  the  Jacobins  in  America  became 
more  radical  than  ever  and  soon  this  division 
drifted  into  white-hot  domestic  faction.  War  be 
tween  France  and  England  in  April,  1793,  flung 
new  fuel  to  these  flames  because  mutual  hatreds 
between  England  and  America  were  still  fresh  and 
ugly.  The  sudden  announcement  that  a  Minister 
from  this  new  and  questionable  French  Republic 
had  arrived  in  Charleston  forced  immediate  de 
cision  upon  what  America's  policy  toward  the 
belligerents  should  be.  Jefferson  recommended 
to  Washington  that  he  lodge  responsibility  for  this 
decision  in  an  extra  session  of  the  Congress.  Ham 
ilton  declared  that  the  responsibility  belonged 
with  the  executive  and  recommended  a  prompt 
proclamation  of  strong,  strict  neutrality  that 
should  fix  our  status  for  all  time  as  independent 
of  European  frictions  and  fortunes.  Jefferson 
wanted  all  our  former  treaty  obligations,  running 
to  the  former  monarchy,  to  be  acknowledged  as  of 

92 


(greatest  American 

full,  continuing  power  and  effect.  Hamilton  pro 
posed  to  take  advantage  of  this  fortuitous  oppor 
tunity  to  discharge  these  legacies  of  the  past  and 
further  effect  complete  American  emancipation  ^ 
from  entangling,  alien  bonds.  Washington's  mind, 
as  usual,  ran  along  with  Hamilton's  upon  whose 
advice  he  acted.  The  Proclamation  of  Neutrality, 
setting  a  traditional  American  fashion  which  has 
lived  to  bless  uncounted  generations,  was  promptly 
issued.  Further  Cabinet  controversy  was  inter 
rupted  by  the  personal  appearance  of  the  French 
Minister,  Citizen  Genet,  himself.  Genet  rushed 
headlong  from  one  embarrassing  excess  to  an 
other.  Hamilton  recommended  drastic  measures 
to  protect  our  neutrality  against  these  brazen  in 
fractions.  He  refused  to  compromise  with  French 
privateering  engineered  by  Genet  out  of  American 
ports  against  British  commerce.  Genet's  actions, 
culminating  in  the  famous  case  of  the  "Little 
Sarah,"  openly  flaunted  American  authority.  No 
less  insultingly,  he  appealed  to  the  American  people 
over  the  heads  of  their  government,  to  rise  to  the 
support  of  the  red  Republic  over-seas.  Hamilton 
wrote  his  "Pacificus"  essays  in  1793  to  answer 
this  maudlin  propaganda  and  arouse  thinking 
Americans  to  the  gravity  of  a  situation  which 

93 


Greatest  American 


threatened  not  alone  the  honor  but  the  actual 
integrity  of  the  new  American  government.  Genet 
finally  made  the  fatal  error  of  raising  a  direct  issue 
with  Washington,  and  the  tides  of  public  sentiment 
turned  upon  him  and  his  power  for  mischief  came 
to  an  abrupt  end.  In  the  beginnings  of  our  foreign 
relations,  even  as  in  our  domestic  affairs,  Hamilton 
in  the  pilot  house,  Hamilton's  hand  upon  the 
wheel,  had  ruddered  the  Ship  of  State  through 
shoals  to  safety  and  left  a  chartered  course  for  the 
guidance  of  other  mariners  in  storms  to  come  with 
new  decades  and  centuries. 

England  now  promptly  succeeded  to  the  center  of 
our  turbulent  stage.  Ever  since  the  conclusion 
of  peace  in  1783,  with  ill-concealed  hostility, 
England  had  sought  by  every  hindrance  to  em 
barrass  and  destroy  our  commerce.  Our  efforts 
to  remedy  these  predicaments  through  the  nego 
tiations  of  Minister  Hammond  had  met  with  but 
indifferent  success.  Finally  these  aggressions  be 
came  so  aggravated  that  open  breach  seemed  inevi 
table.  Hamilton  denounced  them  as  outrageous  and 
demanded  that  the  country  be  put  under  prepara 
tion  for  effective  war,  but  simultaneously  recom 
mended  to  Washington  that  a  special  mission  be 
sent  to  London  in  a  last  effort  at  conciliation. 

94 


(greatest  American 

Hamilton  himself  was  obviously  the  most  eligible 
man  in  America  for  such  a  delicate  and  profoundly 
important  pilgrimage  and  Washington  eagerly 
turned  to  him  as  the  appropriate  and  dependable 
Ambassador.  But  Hamilton's  enemies,  fearing 
to  allow  him  this  tremendous  opportunity  for 
mighty  service  and  resultantly  increased  prestige, 
made  bitter  and  politically  selfish  protest .  Hamil  ton 
himself,  with  customary  poise,  urgently  recommend 
ed  Jay,  and  Washington  prudently  acquiesced  in 
order  to  avoid  unnecessary  faction.  For  the  sake  of 
peace,  Jay's  instructions  were  somewhat  softened, 
after  Hamilton  had  drawn  their  outline,  in  the 
direction  of  greater  concessions  to  England,  and  the 
emissary  was  dispatched  upon  his  momentous  way. 
,.  In  the  interim,  ere  Jay  returned,  Hamilton  put 
down  the  "Whiskey  Rebellion,"  opportunely  dem 
onstrating  that  the  new  government  had  muscle 
equal  to  its  ideals;  completed  his  prescient  financial 
program;  and,  in  1795  resigned  his  portfolio  and 
retired  to  private  life.  But  when  Jay's  Treaty  was 
brought  back  home  in  1796  he  strode  back  into 
the  arena  once  more  to  defend  his  principles,  his 
purposes,  his  policies  and  his  friends.  The  Treaty 
was  not  such  an  engagement  as  Hamilton  would 
have  negotiated  had  he  been  the  American  com- 

95 


(greatest  American 

missioner.  But  the  alternative  choices  of  the  hour 
pointed  either  to  its  acceptance  in  spite  of  its  de 
fects  or  to  almost  certain  war  with  England.  To 
accept  it  was  the  obvious  propriety  and  Hamilton 
promptly  took  his  place  by  Washington's  side  in 
the  desperate  conflict  that  ensued.  All  the  pas 
sions  of  anti-British  hates  and  prejudices  attacked 
the  Treaty,  its  author,  the  Senate,  the  President 
and  the  intrepid  New  Yorker,  now  a  private  citi 
zen,  who  had  proposed  and  largely  directed  the 
mission.  Jay  was  burned  in  effigy  uncounted 
times.  Washington  was  attacked  for  his  "mock 
pageantry  of  monarchy  and  apish  mimicry  of 
kings";  was  taunted  with  being  the  tool  of  Ham 
ilton;  and  even  impeachment  was  demanded. 
Hamilton  himself  was  stoned.  But  these  were  not 
ordinary  men  to  be  daunted  by  peril  or  hindered 
by  attack.  Hamilton  immediately  resorted  to  his 
invincible  pen.  The  tremendous  essays  of  ' '  Camil- 
lus"  stemmed  the  adverse  tide.  But  England 
now  complicated  an  already  treacherous  situation 
with  monumental  but  customary  stupidity.  She 
renewed  the  obnoxious  provision  order  which  had 
already  hastened  crisis.  Neither  Washington  nor 
Hamilton  believed  in  peace-at-any-price.  This 
latest  imposition  was  intolerable.  Washington 

96 


(greatest  American 

drew  his  closest  counselors  together.  Hamilton 
was  first,  as  though  he  had  never  left  the  Cabinet. 
A  final  effort  at  conciliation,  consonant  with  honor, 
was  agreed  upon.  Hamilton  was  inclined  to  be 
more  aggressive,  but  fully  sustained  Washington's 
decision  to  ratify  the  Treaty  and  send  it  to  Eng 
land  with  a  stern  remonstrance  against  the  pro 
vision  order.  This  final  effort  brought  at  least 
a  temporary  lull  in  frictions,  though  Hamilton 
faced  the  continuing  responsibility  long  afterward 
of  defending  the  Jay  Treaty  and  all  of  its  propo 
nents  against  fierce  popular  attack.  But  he  never 
hesitated  to  affirm  that  our  motto  should  be: 
' '  Peace  and  trade  with  all  nations ;  beyond  our  pres- 
ent  engagements,  political  connections  with  none." 
In  the  midst  of  this  turmoil  the  country  faced 
the  necessity  of  electing  a  presidential  successor 
to  Washington,  who  refused  a  third  term.  Hamil 
ton  was  the  leader  of  his  party,  universally 
acknowledged  such  by  friend  and  foe.  Indeed  he 
was  the  incarnation  of  his  party.  But  he  was  not 
a  politician  in  any  sense  of  that  abused  word.  If 
ever  a  man  typified  the  sharp  distinction  between 
a  " politician"  and  a  ''statesman"  it  was  Hamil 
ton.  He  never  gave  a  thought  to  his  own  convinc 
ing  and  commanding  eligibility  as  Washington's 
7  97 


(greatest  American 


executive  successor.  He  favored  the  election  either 
of  John  Adams,  who  ultimately  won  by  the  narrow 
margin  of  three  electoral  votes,  or  Thomas  Pinck- 
ney  of  South  Carolina.  When  Adams  came  to 
the  Presidency  he  cherished  a  deep  resentment 
because  Hamilton  had  not  been  his  sled  -length 
advocate.  Though  he  was  a  sturdy  old  patriot 
of  sterling  heart,  he  was  unreasonable,  irascible 
and  intolerant,  and  he  now  became  intensely 
hostile  toward  the  man  with  whom  he,  despite  his 
high  station,  had  to  share  his  party's  titular  leader 
ship  and  inspiration.  He  made  the  mistake  of 
first  attempting  to  ignore  Hamilton,  and  then  to 
crush  him.  Hamilton's  imperious  nature,  girded 
with  the  consciousness  of  his  own  lofty  and  im 
personal  conduct,  rebelled  against  this  ungenerous 
posture.  He  had  no  aims,  no  aspirations,  for  him 
self  —  only  for  his  country.  He  sought  no  personal 
credits.  Cheerfully  he  had  subordinately  served 
Washington  without  an  unfaithful  or  a  selfish 
thought  and  was  ready  to  continue  in  the  r61e  of 
"fidus  Achates"  under  the  new  regime.  But  he 
would  not,  and  did  not,  allow  his  authority  and 
prestige  —  greater  than  that  of  any  private  citi 
zen  who  ever  lived  —  to  be  flouted  and  ignored. 
Disastrous  breach  was  inevitable. 

98 


(greatest  American 

Hamilton's  personal  ambitions  at  this  time  are 
best  tested  by  his  refusal,  April  24,  1798,  of  an 
appointment  to  the  Senate  to  fill  a  vacancy  created 
by  the  resignation  of  Judge  Hobart.  "I  am 
obliged  by  my  situation  to  decline  the  appoint- 
^ment,"  he  wrote.  "  There  may  arrive  a  crisis 
when  I  may  conceive  myself  bound  once  more  to 
sacrifice  the  interests  of  my  family  to  public  call. 
But  I  must  defer  the  change  as  long  as  possible. " 

As  our  relations  with  England  improved,  our 
relations  with  France  once  more  progressed  from 
bad  to  worse.  The  threat  of  war  had  been  averted 
in  the  one  direction  only  to  be  renewed  in  the  other. 
Hamilton's  plan  of  a  Commission  to  France  was 
adopted  in  the  hope  that  it  might  serve  for  peace 
as  effectually  as  had  his  plan  for  the  Jay  mission 
in  the  prior  case  of  England.  "Real  firmness  is 
good  for  everything;  strut  is  good  for  nothing,"  he 
had  said,  anent  policies  toward  France,  in  a  letter 
to  a  friend.  But  the  selection  of  the  personnel  of 
this  Commission  was  as  disastrous  to  the  President 
and  his  cause  as  was  similar  error  upon  the  occasion 
of  another  mission  to  Paris  in  our  own  time.  Ham 
ilton  had  definite  ideas  as  to  who  should  go  upon 
this  delicate  errand  and  if  he  could  have  had  his 
way  eventualities  unquestionably  would  have  been 

99 


American 


different.  But  Adams,  obsessed  with  the  idea  that 
his  hand  was  being  forced,  chose  otherwise.  The 
outcome  is  history.  Adams'  Commissioners  were 
insulted  and  outraged  and  finally  driven  from 
France.  The  famous  X.  Y.  Z.  papers  disclosed 
the  degrading  depths  to  which  American  honor 
had  been  dragged.  Quickly  followed  new  and 
surpassing  depredations  by  the  French,  new  de 
crees  ravishing  neutral  rights  and  finally  the  burn 
ing  of  an  American  ship  by  a  French  privateer. 
The  passions  that  a  few  years  before  had  burned 
so  fiercely  against  England  now  burst  into  white- 
heat  anger  aimed  at  France.  The  country  swept 
itself  toward  war.  Congress  sped  all  necessary 
measures  of  defense.  Washington  was  recalled 
to  serve  as  Commander-in-Chief.  He  consented 
to  the  draft  provided  Hamilton  should  become 
first  upon  his  staff  and  the  active  leader  in  the  new 
and  perilous  adventure.  Adams  agreed  to  this 
arrangement,  but  undertook  upon  his  own  re 
sponsibility  to  displace  Hamilton  with  Knox. 
Washington's  threat  to  resign  forced  Adams  to 
amend  his  course,  though  his  humiliation  seared 
him  with  a  pyramiding  dislike  of  Hamilton 
which  now  became  a  desperate,  incontinent  and 
indefensible  passion. 

100 


(Sreatesrt  American 


Hamilton  at  once  attacked  his  new  problems 
with  habitual  zeal.  This  story,  like  each  of  the 
other  major  motifs  in  his  life,  is  told  in  detail  else 
where  in  this  volume.  Suffice  it  to  say  that  he 
proved  himself  a  brilliant  master  of  every  branch 
of  military  science,  and  that  he  served  as  first 
ranking  officer  of  the  Army  of  the  United  States 
from  Washington's  death  until  his,  Hamilton's! 
honorable  discharge. 

President  Adams  bungled  the  initial  processes 
of  peace  even  as  he  had  the  initial  processes  of  war. 
He  dealt  secretly  with  France,  ignoring  even  his 
Cabinet,  and  in  selecting  the  personnel  of  his  Peace 
Commission  he  threatened  to  duplicate  the  disaster 
which  his  stubbornness  had  invited  in  selecting  the 
personnel  of  his  Army.  Again  feeling  ran  high, 
and  again  a  word  from  Hamilton  would  have  crys 
tallized  havoc  with  no  less  sinister  disaster  than 
impended  when  Washington  had  faced  his  angry, 
revolting  officers  at  Newburgh.  But  the  word  was 
never  given.  On  the  contrary,  though  bitterly 
impatient  with  Adams,  Hamilton  threw  his  whole 
mighty  influence  unreservedly  into  the  scales  and 
assisted  the  President  of  his  country  to  save  his 
country's  situation. 

The  elections  of  1800  now  came  on — and  with 

101 


(greatest  American 

them  the  beginning  of  the  end.  The  Federalists 
were  not  only  rent  by  internal  discords  precipi 
tated  by  Adams'  treatment  of  Hamilton,  but  also 
they  were  burdened  with  a  popular  displeasure 
which  did  not  relish  Adams'  blunders  and  which 
was  hostile  to  repressive  war  measures  like  the  alien 
and  sedition  acts,  which  the  Congress  had  passed. 
With  that  instinctive  sagacity  which  never  failed 
to  sense  a  popular  frenzy  and  turn  it  to  political 
advantage,  Jefferson  proceeded  with  customary 
subtlety  to  plan  himself  into  the  Presidency.  He 
raised  a  dual  cry — States  rights  and  the  rights  of 
p*^^^  man.  The  former  roused  Hamilton  as  could 
nothing  else  because  it  challenged  his  cherished 
theory  of  impregnable  Constitutional  Union:  the 
latter  stirred  him  because  he  read  in  it  a  covert 
call,  no  less  lethal  under  fragrant  name,  to  those 
I  excesses  which  were  crushing  France.  Jefferson 
i  sounded  off  in  the  "Kentucky  Resolutions"  which 
declared  that  each  State  had  an  inalienable  right 
to  judge  for  itself  whether  or  not  any  act  of  the 
central  government  constituted  an  infraction  of 
the  Constitution,  and  then  to  nullify  the  Act  of 
Union  if  it  deemed  infringement  to  have  occurred. 
Hamilton  urged  that  such  menace  be  disapproved 
formally  by  Congress  and  its  kernels  of  disaster 

IO2 


(greatest  &medcan 

laid  bare.  But  the  stage  was  set  for  temporary 
reaction  from  the  Federalist  era  and  nothing  could 
stem  the  tide  of  prejudice  which  Jefferson  skill 
fully  directed  to  its  mark.  Pennsylvania  was  the 
first  great  Federalist  defeat.  The  New  York  out 
come  immediately  became  crucial.  The  election 
of  the  legislature  which  in  turn  would  chose  presi 
dential  electors  seemed  destined  to  control  the  issue. 
Hamilton  threw  himself  vigorously  into  the  cam 
paign.  As  always,  his  was  the  destiny  to  organize 
and  lead  the  battle.  At  the  head  of  his  antagonists 
was  Aaron  Burr.  Hamilton  depended  upon  the 
weapons  that  had  always  stood  him  in  good  stead 
— brilliant  speeches  and  vigorous  pamphlets,  frank 
and  eloquent  appeals  to  the  brain  and  heart  of  his 
countrymen.  But  Burr  appealed  to  their  cupidity. 
He  organized  the  first,  sordid  political  machine, 
down  to  the  last  voting  precinct  in  the  last  ward, 
American  politics  had  known,  and  he  set  a  first 
precedent  for  electoral  corruption  which  has  served 
as  model  for  entirely  too  many  subsequent  plagia 
rists.  Burr  won.  Hamilton,  in  desperation,  pro 
posed  that  electors  be  chosen  by  districts  out  of  the 
old  State  legislature,  thus  dividing  New  York's 
vote.  Governor  Jay  refused.  Internal  party  strife 
now  became  suicidally  violent.  Adams  drove 

103 


amertcan 


McHenry,  Pickering  and  Wolcott  from  his  Cabinet 
because  they  were  too  friendly  to  Washington  and 
Hamilton,  and  further  loosed  an  unbridled  tongue 
upon  his  factional  opponents,  with  particular  of 
fense  to  Hamilton.  Twice  Hamilton  wrote  for  an 
explanation  and  was  ignored.  With  his  usual 
thoroughness  and  force  he  wrote  a  pamphlet  to 
demonstrate  Adams'  blunders  and  to  vindicate 
himself  and  his  loyal  Federalist  followers.  It  was 
intended  for  private  distribution.  Burr  either 
found1  or  stole2  a  copy  and  gave  it  to  the  nation. 
The  result  of  this  whole  conspiracy  of  circum 
stance  was  inevitable.  The  Federalists  were 
generally  defeated.  But  the  equal  Democratic 
electoral  vote  received  by  Jefferson  and  Burr  threw 
the  presidential  decision  into  the  House  of  Repre 
sentatives.  It  was  another  perilous  hour  in  which 
a  lesser  leader  than  the  '  '  Colossus  of  the  Federal 
ists,"  as  Jefferson  called  Hamilton,  might  have 
washed  his  hands  of  the  whole  bad  affair  and  sub 
mitted  to  disaster  which  might  prematurely  have 
ended  the  Republic's  days.  Reckless  in  the  anger  of 
defeat,  the  Federalists  were  inclined  to  connive  with 
the  willingly  treacherous  Burr  to  elevate  him  above 

1  Oliver's  Alexander  Hamilton. 

2  Lodge's  Life  of  Alexander  Hamilton. 

104 


(greatest  American 

Jefferson.  They  held  the  balance  of  power.  As 
one  historian  has  put  it, x  they  preferred  the  knave 
to  the  hypocrite.  Hamilton  alone  prevented  this 
terrific  error.  He  knew  that  Jefferson  was  the 
clear  preference  of  a  national  majority.  He  fore 
saw  the  dangers  of  licensed  intrigue  in  high  place. 
Above  all,  much  as  he  distrusted  Jefferson,  he 
could  not  consent  that  an  unscrupulous  rascal 
should  assume  supreme  authority  over  a  govern 
ment  to  which  he  had  dedicated  his  life.  It  was 
due  to  him  alone  that  Aaron  Burr  did  not  become 
the  third,  and  perhaps  the  last,  President  of  the 
United  States.  It  was  due  to  him  alone  that  his 
greatest  rival  reached  the  coveted  honor  toward 
which  he  had  fashioned  his  every  act  and  ambition 
back  through  the  years. 

Hamilton  now  retired  to  the  practice  of  law  in 
New  York  where  he  reattained  a  brilliant  profes 
sional  station.  Burr  quarreled  with  Jefferson  who 
was  now  bent  upon  his,  Burr's  political  destruction. 
To  renew  himself  in  prestige  and  authority,  Burr 
became  a  candidate  for  Governor  of  New  York, 
dreaming  of  a  Northern  Confederacy,  with  New 
York  as  a  nucleus,  which  he  might  head.  Ham 
ilton  promptly  came  from  Retirement,  denounced 
1  Oliver's  Alexander  Hamilton. 

105 


(greatest  American 

these  intrigues,  fought  this  political  guerilla  toe  to 
toe,  and  once  more  encompassed  his  defeat.  He 
was  saving  his  State  and  Nation  at  the  expense  of 
his  own  life.  Burr  decided  upon  revenge  and 
pursued  this  purpose  with  vicious  determination. 
Hamilton  had  obstructed  and  thwarted  his  ambi 
tions  at  every  turn  of  his  career.  With  but  one 
exception  he  had  found  "The  Little  Lion"  con 
stantly  blocking  the  paths  that  led  to  a  satisfac 
tion  of  his  crafty  and  unscrupulous  ambitions. 
Deliberate  murder  must  have  been  in  his  heart 
when  he  challenged  Hamilton,  because  his  choice 
of  an  excuse — a  casual  remark  attributed  to  Hamil 
ton  at  the  time  of  the  caucuses  which  nominated 
candidates  for  Governor — was  comparatively  in 
offensive  when  paralleled  with  the  bitter  denuncia 
tion  of  Burr  that  Hamilton  had  poured  out  in  the 
campaign  of  1800.  Formal  letters  were  exchanged 
and  the  duel  arranged.  Hamilton  loathed  duel 
ing.  He  had  no  desire  to  fight.  But  he  felt  that 
this  greatest  service  to  his  beloved  country  re 
quired  him  to  prove  unimpeachable  courage  as 
measured  by  any  code — most  of  all  the  code  which 
was  most  convincing  to  those  whom  he  adjudged 
the  enemies  of  his  country's  welfare.  It  merely 
adds  to  the  sublimity  of  his  character  to  know 

1 06 


The  Hamilton  Monument  at  Weehawken,  New  Jersey 


(greatest  American 


that  only  a  short  time  before,  Burr  had  come  to 
him  in  great  pecuniary  distress  and  besought 
aid  which  Hamilton  had  readily  granted  out  of  the 
prodigal  generosity  of  a  benign  heart.  Burr  pre 
pared  for  the  duel  by  pistol  practice  in  his  garden; 
Hamilton,  by  closing  the  affairs  of  clients  who  were 
dependent  upon  his  offices.\  Hamilton  concluded 
these  preparations  by  penning  beautifully  touch 
ing  farewell  letters  to  his  wife;  Burr,  by  gathering 
together  incriminating  notes  from  women  whom 
he  had  seduced,  and  arranging  them  with  a  hint  to 
his  beloved  but  penniless  daughter  that  she  might 
capitalize  them  into  a  pretty  piece  of  blackmail. 
Such  were  the  adversaries;  such  the  actors  in  one 
of  the  greatest  tragedies  of  time! 

In  the  early  morning  of  July  n,  1804,  the  men 
met  at  Weehawken  on  a  grassy  plot  overlooking 
the  Hudson  River  and  Manhattan  Island.  At  the 
first  shot  Hamilton  fell,  mortally  wounded.  His 
own  pistol  did  not  explode  until  he  was  falling  to 
the  ground.  His  own  previously  expressed  inten 
tion  had  been  not  to  fire  at  the  given  word.  He 
had  refused  to  have  the  hair-spring  trigger  set.  He 
had  refused,  previously,  to  practice  by  shooting  at 
a  mark.  All  this  was  not  "  irrelevant  chivalry.  "x 

1  Oliver's  Alexander  Hamilton. 

107 


(Greatest  American 

It  was  the  philosophy  of  a  patriot  who  was  fully 
convinced  that  the  greatest  final  service  he  could 
render  to  his  country  was  to  shock  it,  by  his  death, 
into  ^realization  of  its  dangers  and  its  foes. 

Hamilton  was  immediately  attended  by  a  sur 
geon.  He  was  rushed  back  across  the  river  to  New 
York.  After  a  few  hours  of  excruciating  pain,  he 
passed  to  his  reward.  While  Burr  slunk  away  in 
hiding  to  escape  the  fury  of  an  outraged  people, 
Hamilton  was  buried  with  all  the  honors  and 
tributes  of  fervid  love  and  grateful  veneration  that 
a  heart-stricken  nation  could  pile  upon  his  bier. 
"The  mourning,"  wrote  Fiske,  *  "was  like  that 
called  forth  in  after  years  by  the  murder  of  Abra 
ham  Lincoln."  His  remains  were  consigned  to  the 
earth  in  Trinity  Churchyard,  at  the  head  of  Wall 
Street,  where  to  this  day  a  modest  monument, 
nestling  near  the  southern  fence,  keeps  eternal 
vigil  over  the  ashes  of  The  Greatest  American. 
1  Essays,  Historical  and  Literary.  Vol.  I. 


108 


jWasiter  Putlfcer  of  American  3Smon 

THE  erection  of  an  indivisibly  federalized  Union 
of  American  states,  impregnated  with  power  suf 
ficient  unto  its  effective  functioning  and  self- 
preservation,  was  the  composite,  God-inspired 
achievement  of  so  many  different  minds  and  hearts, 
all  fused  in  common  aspiration,  that  no  one  man 
among  the  founders  can  be  set  apart  and  endowed 
with  major  credit  for  the  creation.  Any  attempts 
at  such  ascription  are  narrow  idolatry.  Colonial 
America  in  the  closing  decades  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  emerging  into  republican  autonomy,  was 
blessed  with  too  many  leaders  of  sturdy  courage 
and  apocalyptic  genius  to  allow  grateful  posterity  to 
isolate  any  one  of  them  and  truthfully  acknowledge 
to  his  memory  an  exclusive  debt.  To  all  who 
participated  we  must  grant  just  veneration^  But 
this  multiplicity  of  obligation  need  not  prevent  a 
relative  survey  of  the  contribution  made  by  each; 
and  if  such  a  survey  comprehend:  first,  the  concep 
tion  of  the  idea  of  the  ultimately  effected  Union ; 

109 


(greatest  American 

second,  the  attainment  of  the  Constitutional  Con 
vention  in  which  the  idea  crystallized;  third,  the 
vitalization  of  the  idea  in  the  Constitution  itself; 
fourth,  the  achievement  of  practical  results  through 
the  Constitution's  adoption;  and,  fifth,  the  fortifica 
tion  of  the  attained  idea  through  the  bulwarked 
establishment  of  its  basic  principles  and  most  es 
sential  powers  and  interpretations,  no  one  man  can 
compete,  in  this  variety  of  service,  with  Alexander 
Hamilton,  who,  by  this  token,  becomes  the  Master 
Builder  of  American  Union. 

From  the  moment  when,  as  a  campus  youth,  he 
startled  New  York  by  his  uninvited  but  unap 
proachable  eloquence  and  logic  at  the  famous 
''Meeting  in  The  Field,"1  he  was  the  swaddling 
nation's  premier  advocate  and  proctor  in  liberty 
.  and  federated  Union.  From  that  historic  hour 
until  he  was  shot  down  thirty  years  later,  a  martyr 
to  his  fidelities,  he  never  ceased  to  be  the  inspiration 
and  director  of  those  forces  in  America  which 
dedicated  themselves  to  the  attainment  of  those 
federated  Union  institutions  that  have  been  and 
are  to-day  the  palladium  of  our  ordered  liberties. 

When  Hamilton  saw  the  terrific  impotence  of  the 
old  Continental  Congress  in  its  vacillating,  inade- 

Isj 

1  July  6,  1774. 

no 


<§reate£t  American 

quate,  timorous  relations  with  General  Washington; 
when  he  sensed  the  menace  of  this  weak  and  all 
but  futile  authority,  threatening  its  own  aspirations 
by  its  own  paralysis,  he  wrote  to  James  Duane, 
himself  a  member  of  the  Congress,  and  in  an  his 
toric  letter  proposed,  for  the  first  time  in  the  story 
of  the  States,  a  Convention  for  the  purpose  of 
creating  a  federal  Constitution  that  should  erect  a 
central  government  capable  of  its  own  preservation 
and  evolution.  This  was  the  first,  modest,  humble 
conception  of  the  ;great  undertaking  that  was  ulti 
mately  to  emancipate  a  people  from  their  own  inde 
cision  and  scuttling  uncertainties.  It  was  speedily 
amplified  in  a  series  of  six  papers,  together  called 
''The  Continentalist "  which  he  wrote  in  the  sum 
mer  of  1781  and  through  which  he  eloquently 
expounded  the  need  for  federal  authority  in  all  es 
sential  directions.  A  few  months  later  he  wrote 
to  his  bosom  friend,  the  brilliant  Laurens,  that  to 
make  independence  a  blessing  "  we  must  secure  our 
Union  on  solid  foundations — a  herculean  task,  and 
to  effect  which  mountains  of  prejudice  must  be 
leveled.'*  His  was  a  lonesome  oracle  in  these 
primordial  days.  But  it  was  nonetheless  consist 
ent  and  persevering  and  prescient.  It  set  the 
standard  to  which  he  was  as  constant  as  the  needle 

in 


(greatest  American 

to  the  pole  in  every  succeeding  development  in  the 
disclosures  of  American  destiny.  The  Master 
Builder,  like  the  later  heir  to  his  faiths  in  the  sub 
sequent  crises  of  Civil  War,  had  but  one  plan  upon 
his  trestleboard — a  plan  that  builded  for  America 
upon  the  solid  cornerstone  of  indissoluble  Union. 
When  Hamilton  accepted  his  first  public  trust 
of  a  civil,  as  distinguished  from  a  military,  charac 
ter,  in  1782,  he  forced  the  New  York  legislature- 
reluctant  to  negotiate  the  adventure,  but  convinced 
against  its  own  prejudice  and  timidity — to  pass 
resolutions  demanding  a  new  constitutional  con 
vention  and  a  closer  consolidation  of  the  States. 
This  federalization  of  America  was  his  passion, 
even  as  to-day  it  is  his  monument.  He  was  in  con 
stant  communication  with  Washington  during 
these  uncertain  days  when  independence  had  been 
won  but  not  insured.  He  alone  fully  caught  the 
aspirations  of  the  great,  exalted  leader  whom 
affectionate  tradition  has  called  "The  Father  of 
His  Country."  He  understood  as  did  no  other 
American  of  his  time  what  it  was  in  Washington's 
heart  that  prompted  the  General's  circular  letter 
to  the  Governors  of  the  States,  praying  for  "an 
indissoluble  Union  of  the  States  under  one  federal 
head."  He  understood  because  it  was  his  own 

112 


(greatest  American 


blazed  trail  down  which  Washington  was  proud  to 
travel.  "Unless  Congress  have  powers  competent 
to  all  general  purposes/'  Washington  wrote  Ham 
ilton,1  "the  distresses  we  have  encountered,  the 
expense  we  have  incurred  and  the  blood  we  have 
spilt,  will  avail  us  nothing."  These  two  tremen 
dous  toilers  for  posterity  were  in  a  union  of  hopes 
and  aspirations  no  less  cemented  than  the  Union  of 
States  for  which  they  prayed  and  strove.  The  r61e 
Washington  played  in  ultimate  achievement  shall 
never  be  depreciated.  But  if  he  were  here  to-day 
it  would  not  be  the  mere  magnanimity  for  which  he 
was  famous  which  would  produce  his  prompt  testi 
mony  to  Hamilton's  incalculably  indispensable 
contribution.  Such  testimony  would  but  reflect  a 
true  estimate  of  historical  values  and  historical 
justice. 

The  eminent  historical  authority,  Hannis  Taylor, 
|in  his  great  work  upon  "The  Origin  and  Growth 
of  the  American  Constitution"  gives  Pelatiah 
Webster  credit  for  being  the  first  proponent  of  a 
federal  constitutional  convention.  Passing  that 
argument,  the  fact  remains  that  Taylor  himself 
puts  heavy  emphasis  upon  Hamilton's  pioneer 
record.  He  declares  that  when  Hamilton,  himself 

1  Sparks'  Washington.     Vol.  VIII. 

113 


(greatest  American 

then  a  member  of  the  Continental  Congress,  on 
April  i,  1783,  expressed  in  Congress  his  desire  "to 
see  a  general  convention  take  place,  and  that  he 
would  soon,  in  pursuance  of  instructions  from  his 
constituents,  propose  to  Congress  a  plan  for  that 
purpose,"  it  was  the  first  time  such  an  aspiration 
had  been  voiced  on  the  floor  of  Congress;  and  that 
when  Congress,  four  weeks  later,  appointed  a  com 
mittee  on  pending  resolutions  in  favor  of  a  general 
convention,  "so  far  as  the  records  show  never  till 
then"  had  the  undertaking  been  thus  dignified. 
Thus  did  Hamilton  press  every  advantage  in  behalf 
of  the  great  American  experiment. 

When  Maryland  and  Virginia  composed  an  inter 
state  commercial  compact  and  proposed  a  general 
convention  at  Annapolis  in  1786  that  should^make 
these  commercial  undertakings  uniform  throughout 
the  States,  Hamilton  saw  the  possibility  that  this 
limited  and  quite  unpromising  invitation  might  b< 
capitalized  into  the  larger  project  which  he  knew  to 
be  at  the  vitals  of  a  preserved  America.  He  dropped 
his  fast  multiplying  and  profitable  private  fortunes 
and  leaped  to  the  forward  march.  "He  never  let 
'I  dare  not'  wait  upon  'I  would.' "x  He  forced 
New  York  to  send  a  delegation  to  Annapolis  and 

1  Macbeth. 

114 


(greatest  American 

headed  it  in  person.  He  found  his  associates, 
other  than  those  from  New  Jersey,  bound  by 
limited  credentials  which  precluded  any  major 
project.  But  with  that  invincible  logic  and  elo 
quence,  before  which  no  unsound  opposition 
could  ever  stand,  he  forced  the  Annapolis  conven 
tion  to  adopt  an  address  which  he  drew,  challeng 
ing  national  candor  to  concede  the  desperate  ne 
cessity  for  a  complete  re-organization  of  the 
government,  and  calling  for  a  new  convention  to 
meet  these  needs  and  to  be  attended  by  repre 
sentatives  clothed  with  general  powers  sufficient 
unto  this  end. 

Returning  to  New  York,  he  won  a  seat  in  the 
New  York  legislature  that  he  might  lead  in  the 
active  battle  as  he  had  in  the  councils  which 
precipitated  it.  He  was  facing  the  batteries  of 

•>vernor  Clinton,  the  most  powerful  politician 
his  day,  an  executive  who  appealed  to  mass 
psychology  because  he  had  made  New  York  the 
greatest  State  in  the  Confederation.  Clinton 
was  bitterly  arraigned  against  any  new  federal- 
ization  that  should  curb  the  prerogatives  of  the 
States  or  erect  a  super-sovereignty  above  them. 
He  held  his  legislature  in  the  hollow  of  his  hand. 
It  was  the  first,  but  not  the  last,  of  the  tremen- 

115 


(greatest  American 

dous  conflicts  which  Hamilton,  now  thirty  years  of 
age,  had  to  win  against  hostile  majorities  that  were 
committed  against  him  in  advance.  It  was  the 
first,  but  not  the  last,  occasion  in  which  he  was 
conjuror  and  conqueror  alike  in  behalf  of  the  new 
freedom.  No  other  man  lived  in  that  era  who 
could  have  done  the  particular  things  he  did — and 
those  particular  things  were  absolutely  vital.  Such 
achievement  required  a  rare  combination  of  elo 
quence,  logic,  pertinacity,  courage  and  personality. 
Above  alHt  required  a  dominating  intellect  which 
could  lead  against  all  odds — a  pillar  of  cloud  by 
day,  a  pillar  of  fire  by  night.  Hamilton  forced 
Clinton's  legislature  to  vote  New  York  representa 
tion  in  the  Constitutional  Convention  soon  to 
gather  in  Philadelphia,  and  he  forced  his  own 
election  as  one  of  New  York's  three  Commis 
sioners,  the  other  two  being  stubborn,  State 
rights'  Clintonians.  The  greatest  human  achieve^ 
ment  of  ancient  or  modern  times  was  now  in 
distant  sight,  though  stupendous  barriers  still  all 
but  obscured  the  goal. 

On  May  14,  1787,  the  great  Constitutional  Con 
vention  assembled  in  Philadelphia.  On  May  25 
it  secured  a  quorum  and,  under  the  inspired  Presi 
dency  of  General  Washington,  proceeded  to  its 

116 


(Sreate^t  American 


tremendous  tasks*  Never  was  there  a  human 
parliament  of  higher  average  intellect  and  purpose  ; 
yet,  amid  such  competition  "  Hamilton  was  easily 
the  most  brilliant  man  in  the  company.  '  '  x  General 
opinions  divided  between  the  "Virginia  Plan" 
and  the  "  New  Jersey  Plan."  The  former  contem 
plated  a  Union  of  the  People;  the  latter  a  mere 
league  of  States.  Hamilton  was  satisfied  with 
neither.  Although  he  did  not  take  a  continu 
ously  active  part  upon  the  floor  of  the  convention, 
chiefly  because  he  was  inevitably  out-voted  when 
ever  his  packed  New  York  delegation  spoke,  in  a 
six-hour  speech  which  all  history  testifies  to  have 
been  the  masterpiece  of  its  time  and  occasion,  he 
presented  his  own  alternative  to  the  two  pending 
skeletons.  Gouverneur  Morris  declared  this  speech 
1  '  the  most  able  and  impressive  he  had  ever  heard  '  '  ; 
and  Roosevelt  has  said  that  Morris  was  a 
"shrewder  more  far-seeing  observer  and  recorder 
of  contemporary  men  and  events  than  any  other 
American  or  foreign  statesman  of  his  time."2 

The  most  striking  novelty  which  Hamilton 
proposed  was  the  election  by  State  Electors  of  a 
Senate  and  a  President  who  should  serve  for  life 

1  Robert  W.  McLaughlin's  Washington  and  Lincoln. 

2  Life  of  Gouverneur  Morris,  by  Theodore  Roosevelt. 


(greatest  American 

unless  removed  for  cause.  The  motif  permeating 
his  entire  structure  was  a  powerful,  centralized 
federal  authority  resting  upon  selective  suffrage. 
His  basic  purposes  were  dual:  first,  to  avoid  "any 
confederation  leaving  the  states  in  possession  of 
their  sovereignty,"  as  Madison  tells  us  in  his 
"Reports" ;  second,  to  avoid  that  mutability  in  the 
institutions  of  government  which  he  feared  would 
be  unstabilizing  in  whatever  degree  lack  of  central 
power  should  permit.  For  this  latter  conviction 
Hamilton  has  been  traditionally  scheduled  as  an 
aristocrat  in  contradistinction  to  a  democrat. 
If  this  brand,  "aristocrat,"  intends  odium  in 
this  relation  it  is  no  more  deserved  than  would 
be  kindred  imputation  against  Washington.  No 
impious  hands  seek  to  soil  Washington's  spotless 
mantle  merely  because  he  was  the  richest  man  of 
his  period.  It  is  equally  absurd  to  impugn  the 
motives  of  Hamilton,  who  built  his  genius  from  the 
humblest  beginnings  amid  poverty  and  handicap, 
merely  because  he  believed  in  safe-guarding  de 
mocracy  against  its  own  passions  in  order  that  the 
best  elements  of  democracy  might  be  successfully 
protected  against  those  self-contained  dangers 
which  his  superior  knowledge  of  history  and  human 
kind  warned  him  were  greatly  to  be  feared.  "Give 

118 


(greatest  American 

all  power  to  the  many  and  they  will  oppress  the 
few,"  Madison  tells  us  Hamilton  argued.  "Give 
all  power  to  the  few  and  they  will  oppress  the  many. 
Both,  therefore,  ought  to  have  the  power  that  each 
may  defend  itself  against  the  other."  A  sounder 
philosophy  was  never  pronounced:  and  the  best 
compliment  to  it  is  in  its  acute  exemplification  in 
the  scheme  of  checks  and  balances  which  wove  its 
way  into  the  fabric  of  the  completed  Constitution. 
"The  idea  of  introducing  a  monarchy  or  aristo 
cracy  into  this  country  ...  is  one  of  those 
visionary  things  that  none  but  madmen  could 
meditate  and  that  no  wise  man  will  believe," 
Hamilton  wrote  upon  occasion  to  Washington.1 
"There  is  not  the  slightest  evidence,  except  Mr. 
Jefferson's  assertion,  that  there  was  a  single  resident 
in  the  city  at  that  period,  except  foreign  residents, 
who  were  any  less  partial  to  Republicanism  than 
himself;  certainly  General  Washington,  General 
Knox,  Colonel  Hamilton,  Mr.  Adams  and  Mr.  Jay 
.  .  .  never  on  any  occasion  whatever  breathed  or 
wrote  a  syllable  to  authorize  an  imputation  against 
them  or  any  of  them  of  a  predilection  for  kingly  or 
aristocratic  institutions,"  declares  an  older  his- 

1  The  Works  of  Alexander  Hamilton,  edited  by  Senator 
Henry  Cabot  Lodge. 

119 


American 


tory.  l  A  none-  too-friendly  modern  critic2  adds 
that  these  charges  against  Hamilton  were  "based 
upon  garbled  reports  of  his  speech  and  were  made 
for  political  purposes  .  .  .  Hamilton  had  not 
proposed  a  monarchy.  When  some  of  his  fellow 
delegates  were  hesitating  through  fear  of  public 
opinion,  he  expressed  himself  bravely  and  unequi 
vocally  for  a  strong,  centralized  government  that 
should  be  free  from  any  danger  of  State  interfer 
ence.  "  Yet  so  wild  did  some  frenzies  upon  this 
score  ultimately  become  that  for  a  time  extreme 
fanatics  believed  the  lurid  tale  that  Hamilton  and 
others  had  a  plot  to  bring  over  the  second  son  of 
the  British  King  and  make  him  King  of  the  United 
States.  These  aspersions  —  then  and  in  their  later 
echo  by  historians  —were  just  as  true  as  the  sub 
sequent  fairy  tales  that  John  Adams,  when  Presi 
dent,  planned  inter-marriage  with  the  family  of 
George  III.  This  same  spirit  of  suspicion  bitterly 
attacked  the  organization  of  the  famous  Society  of 
the  Cincinnati,  an  order  to  which  Revolutionary 
officers  and  their  oldest  male  heirs  were  primarily 
eligible,  and  over  which  Washington  presided  with 
Hamilton,  as  usual,  at  his  right  hand.  The  fallacy 

1  Griswold's  American  Society,  1855. 

2  Prof.  Max  Farrand  in  The  Framing  of  The  Constitution. 

120 


(greatest  American 

of  this  suspicion,  ultimately  finding  its  chief  oracle 
in  Jefferson,  may  be  gauged  by  modern  inquiry 
into  the  extent  to  which  The  Daughters  of  The 
American  Revolution,  for  example,  threaten  us 
with  a  menacing  trend  toward  "hereditary 
nobility,"  Jefferson's  phrase. 

The  word  " republic"  in  those  days  had  not  ac 
cumulated  its  modern  honorable  meaning.     In 
stead  it  bespoke  the  pattern  of  those  turbulent 
mass-decisions  which  were  the  bane  of  Athens  and 
Rome.     When  Hamilton  despaired  of  republican  \| 
government  established  over  so  great  an  area  as  \ 
the  American  States  even  then  embraced,  he  was  A 
thinking  of  the  dangers  of  a  pure  democracy — '  [ 
dangers  which  always  were  and  always  will  be 
lethal.     It  was  no  lack  of  allegiance  to  popular 
government  which  sent  him  to  the  forum  to  advo 
cate  his  alternative  plan  at  Philadelphia.     On  the 
contrary,  it  was  that  sublimity  of  exalted  allegiance 
which  dared  to  challenge  a  popular  obsession  for  ^/ 
the  sake  of  protecting  popular  government  itself. 
More:  Hamilton's  most  understanding  biographers* 
report  that  he  was  deliberately  proposing  an  extreme 
for  which  he  had  neither  expectation  nor  wish  of 
success,  for  the  sake  of  matching  extremes  in  an 
opposite  direction  and  thus  assuring  sanity  and 

121 


(greatest  American 


strength  and  permanence  in  the  ultimate,  inevitable 
compromise.  Never  was  there  keener  sagacity 
or  purer  motive.  His  one  everlasting  aim  was  a 
Union  capable  of  its  own  defense  and  preservation, 
and  he  achieved  his  aim. 

The  true  inwardness  of  all  his  purpose  is  unan 
swerably  demonstrated  by  the  fact  that  when  the 
Convention  was  done  with  its  historic  labors,  when 
compromise  had  been  effected  upon  the  Constitu 
tion  under  which  we  still  abide,  Hamilton,  deserted 
by  his  two  States-Rights  associates  from  his  home 
Commonwealth,  took  the  solemn,  isolated  re 
sponsibility,  singly  and  alone,  on  the  iyth  of 
September,  of  signing  the  new  Covenant  of  Free 
dom  on  behalf  of  the  great  State  of  New  York.  But 
for  him  and  his  flaming  courage,  New  York  would 
have  been  absent  from  that  honor  roll  and  if  New 
York  had  been  absent,  no  post-mortem  prophet 
dare  say  what  might  have  been  the  Constitution's 
and  the  Union's  fate. 

Washington,  Hamilton,  Madison,  Gouverneur 
Morris  and  James  Wilson  were  the  supreme  quin 
tette  in  this  constitutional  achievement.  Hamil 
ton,  surrounded  in  his  own  delegation  by  the  Con 
stitution's  foes,  labored  assiduously  from  first  to 
last  —  among  the  people  outside  and  the  delegates 

122 


(greatest  American 

inside — for  the  attainment  of  his  traditional  ideals; 
and  the  fact  that  he  would  have  dictated  some  con 
stitutional  details  otherwise  than  as  finally  drafted, 
is  lost  in  the  greater  contemplation  that  he  won 
his  basic  aims  to  an  extent  best  demonstrated  by 
the  soul- deep  conviction  with  which  he  proceeded 
to  wean  a  hostile  public  opinion  away  from  its 
timidity,  its  prejudices,  its  hesitancy,  its  fears. 

The  battled  for  ratification  of  the  Constitution 
by  the  States  now  moved  swiftly  into  action. 
There  was  no  blinking  the  fact  that  a  majority 
of  the  people  were  opposed  to  the  new  Covenant. 
Politicians  who  cherished  existing  perquisites  were 
unwilling  to  trade  their  easy  opportunities  for  a 
system  that  promised  economical  and  unexploited 
administration.  Leaders  who  were  important  in  a 
little  sovereignty  hesitated  to  compete  for  prefer 
ence  in  wider  areas.  Each  State  was  jealous  alike 
of  its  neighbors  and  its  own  unimpeached  au 
thority.  Even  the  far-flung  influence  of  covetous 
foreign  courts  was  not  averse  to  seeing  Union  fail. 
But  the  American  alternative  was  anarchy  and 
disintegration,  and  the  sturdy  exponents  of  the 
new  faith,  undaunted  by  obstacles  and  unafraid, 
proceeded  to  the  contest.  To  Hamilton,  still  but 
a  youth  of  thirty-one,  fell  the  supreme  responsi- 

123 


(©veatesit  American 

bili ties,  and  from  him  sprang  an  invincibly  com 
pelling  leadership  without  which  the  Constitution 
would  have  failed. 

Hamilton's  first  great  triumph  was  in  the  pub 
lication  of  "The  Federalist"  papers.  To  this 
erudite  work  Madison  contributed  some  and  Jay 
a  little.  But  in  idea  and  major  execution  this 
mighty  genesis  of  constitutional  literature  was  of 
and  by  "The  Little  Lion."  "'The  Federalist/" 
wrote  Senator  Henry  Cabot  Lodge  in  his  admirable 
Life  of  Hamilton,  "throughout  the  length  and 
breadth  of  the  United  States  did  more  than  any 
thing  else  that  was  either  written  or  spoken,  to 
secure  the  adoption  of  the  new  scheme."  So 
thoroughly  true  is  this,  and  so  superlatively  im 
portant  is  "The  Federalist"  even  to-day  in  its 
profound  governmental  axioms,  that  a  greater 
detail — and  corresponding  estimate  of  Hamilton's 
genius  in  this  respect — awaits  separate  study  in  a 
chapter  hence. 

Now  came  the  acid  test.  Now  arrived  the  hour 
of  Armageddon.  Governor  Clinton  failed  to  pre 
vent  legislative  action  calling  a  New  York  Con 
vention  to  pass  upon  the  question  of  ratification, 
but  in  the  election  of  delegates  he  and  his  adherent 
captured  46  out  of  65  seats,  and  he,  sworn  foe  to  the 

124 


(greatest  American 

Constitution,  was  elected  to  preside.  At  the  head 
of  the  sturdy,  close-knit,  desperately  determined 
minority  was  Hamilton,  again,  as  always,  in  the 
breach.  The  odds  would  have  overwhelmed 
hearts  that  were  less  stout  or  intentions  less  sub 
lime.  Nineteen  to  forty-five!  And  every  man  of 
this  bitterly  partisan  Clintonian  majority  had  been 
elected  on  specific  understanding  that  he  would 
oppose  the  Constitution!  Leading  them  was 
Melancthon  Smith,  one  of  the  ablest  debaters  of 
that  epoch.  Wielding  the  gavel  was  the  gruff 
Clinton  himself,  intent  upon  victory  at  any  price. 
Yet  the  Federalists,  for  as  such  they  were  now 
known  under  Hamilton's  courageous  inspiration, 
faced  thi£  coalition  with  perfect  determination  ulti 
mately  to  overcome  the  Constitution's  foes.  No 
fiction  ever  paralleled  such  a  parliamentary  drama. 
No  marshal  ever  deployed  his  forces  against  more 
unequal  odds.  But  no  cause  was  ever  blessed 
with  more  intrepidly  brilliant,  sagacious  and  re 
sourceful  leadership  and  no  final  victory  ever  paid 
higher  testimony  to  the  genius  of  one  man.  Herod 
otus  had  no  more  compelling  text  than  this  when 
he  wrote  Leonidas  into  everlasting  history  for  his 
lonesome  exploit  in  holding  the  pass  at  Ther 
mopylae,  nor  Lord  Macaulay  when  he  immortalized 

125 


(greatest  American 

Horatius  At  The  Bridge  in  his  celebrated  "Lays 
of  Ancient  Rome." 

New  York  was  neither  the  richest  nor  the  most 
populous  of  the  States.  But  it  was  pivotal,  mid 
way  from  north  to  south.  Without  it,  the  Con 
stitution,  even  though  ratified  by  the  required 
nine  states  necessary  to  validation,  would  have 
been  a  precarious  adventure.  Without  it,  effec 
tive  Union  would  have  been  impossible.  With  it, 
almost  any  eventuality  was  safe.  The  destiny  of  a 
new  world  and  an  uplifted  civilization  hung 
largely  upon  Hamilton:  nor  did  it  lean  upon  a 
broken  reed.  Such  was  the  precarious  situation 
when  this  New  York  Convention  gathered  on 
June  17,1 788.  Delaware,  New  Jersey  and  Georgia 
had  already  ratified  the  new  Constitution  unani 
mously;  Pennsylvania,  by  a  vote  of  46  to  23; 
Connecticut,  by  a  vote  of  128  to  40;  Massachu 
setts,  by  a  vote  of  187  to  1 68;  Maryland,  by  a  vote 
of  63  to  12 ;  and  South  Carolina,  by  a  vote  of  149  to 
73.  A  ninth  ratification  and  the  thing  was  done! 
But  unless  that  ninth  or  a  subsequent  ratification 
was  pivotal  New  York's,  the  thing  was  done  in 
vain. 

The  followers  of  Clinton  urged  delay.  Hamilton 
met  this  issue  boldly  and  won  his  first  advantage 

126 


(greatest  American 


in  a  vote  which  at  least  disclosed  justification  for 

& 

belief  that  fair-play  might  hope  for  ultimate 
chance.  Then  he  settled  to  his  long  and  arduous 
task  of  beating  down  his  opposition  by  sheer  weight 
of  logic,  charm  of  aphoristic  eloquence  and  daunt 
less  perseverance  in  the  right.  Never  once  in  the 
gruelling  grind  did  he  yield  faith  or  purpose. 
Asked  by  a  friend  for  a  message  to  take  back  from 
Poughkeepsie  to  New  York  regarding  prospects 
for  the  Constitutional  ratification,  Hamilton  re 
plied  :  "God  only  knows.  Several  votes  have  been 
taken  by  which  it  appears  that  there  are  two  to 
one  against  us.  But  tell  them  that  the  Convention 
shall  never  rise  until  the  Constitution  is  adopted.'* 
And  it  never  did ! 

The  news  that  New  Hampshire  had  ratified  the 
Constitution  on  June  21,  by  a  vote  of  57  to  46,  was 
rushed  to  Hamilton  by  courier.  Nine  states  had 
now  acted.  The  Constitution,  by  its  own  terms, 
was  now  in  effect.  Only  the  greater  became  the 
responsibility  upon  New  York  if  it  should  refuse 
acquiescence  upon  which  the  fate  of  the  whole 
gigantic  experiment  undoubtedly  hung.  By  the 
same  token  the  greater  became  the  responsibility 
upon  Hamilton.  For  days  at  a  time  he  pressed 
home  his  lucid,  luminous  appeals.  Every  phase 

127 


(greatest  American 

of  the  new  code  was  submitted  to  that  perfection 
of  compelling  analysis  of  which  he  was  and  is 
America's  prime  master.  Another  courier  tore 
into  town  with  the  news  that  Virginia,  by  a  vote  of 
89  to  79  on  June  25,  had  joined  the  new  United 
States.  The  Clintonians,  worn  to  desperation  by 
the  futility  of  attempting  to  escape  Hamilton's 
artillery  of  argument,  felt  their  weakening  strength. 
They  were  finding  it  less  and  less  possible  to  face 
Hamilton's  embattled  words.  But  they  were 
stubborn  in  their  turgid  prejudices  and  passion. 
They  tried  the  expedient  of  adjournment  and  were 
defeated.  They  tried  amendments.  They  tried 
conditional  ratification.  It  was  all  to  no  avail. 
Hamilton  had  convinced  a  sector  of  his  adversaries 
against  their  will  and  their  pre-election  pledges. 
It  is  doubtful  whether  the  world's  history  of 
polemics  can  produce  a  parallel  in  extent  of  ora 
tory's  directly  proven  power.  With  consummate 
skill,  he  had  molded  the  hearts  and  consciences  of 
hostile  critics  to  the  standards  he  professed.  As 
one  understanding  historian  has  summed  it  up  in 
more  recent  years:  it  was  "the  dramatic  spectacle 
of  a  'visionary^young  man'  struggling  against  the 
discipline  of  overwhelming  odds,  day  after  day  for 
six  weary  weeks,  and  in  the  end  overcoming  all 

128 


(greatest  Smeucan 

opposition  by  the  prowess  of  a  great  character 
strung  to  its  highest  pitch  by  the  inspiration  of  a 
great  idea."1  As  for  an  exposition  of  the  federal 
theory  of  Union,  its  Constitutional  evolution  and 
the  authority  of  an  indissoluble  United  States,  the 
debates  between  Hamilton  and  Smith  deserve  to 
rank,  in  this  and  every  other  historical  respect, 
with  the  later  passages  between  Webster  and 
Hayne,  and  between  Lincoln  and  Douglas. 

Melancthon  Smith,  the  leader  against  whom 
Hamilton  had  led  his  hosts,  finally  admitted  that 
he  was  driven  to  agree  with  the  position  of  his 
adversary  and  that  he  would  vote  for  ratification. 
Then  and  there  the  backbone  of  Union's  opposi 
tion  broke.  The  Convention  which  in  the  begin 
ning  had  stood  45  to  19  against  the  Hamiltonian 
code,  voted  on  July  26, 1 788, 30  to  28  in  favor  of  rati 
fication.  Not  through  manipulation  or  devious 
politics  had  this  reversal  come.  It  was  a  tribute 
to  the  commanding  genius  of  the  greatest  friend 
the  American  Constitution  ever  had.  The  dream 
which  Hamilton,  a  college  youth,  had  disclosed  at 
"The  Meeting  in  The  Fields "  in  New  York  City, 
July  6,  1774,  was  a  dream  no  more.  The  United 
States  was  become  the  powerful,  federalized  entity 

1  Oliver's  Alexander  Hamilton. 

129 


(greatest  American 

which  he  had  besought  with  ceaseless  anxiety 
through  fourteen  fertile  years.  Small  wonder  that 
New  York  City  welcomed  him  with  a  noisy  festival 
of  acclamatory  joy;  and  that  in  the  great  pageant 
which  celebrated  the  occasion,  the  Federal  Frigate 
bore  the  magic  letters  H-A-M-I-L-T-O-N  em 
blazoned  on  every  side  of  it.  Washington's  com 
paratively  silent  but  impressive  influence,  always 
commending  the  Constitution  to  the  people,  was  a 
mighty  factor  in  its  creation  and  acceptance. 
Madison  and  many  another  patriot  rendered  yeo 
man  service  in  this  indescribably  great  crisis  in  the 
tides  of  men.  But  the  greatest  single  service  of  all 
was  rendered  by  this  brilliant  youth  in  whose  blood 
was  the  hot  enthusiasm  of  the  tropics,  in  whose 
heart  was  a  love  of  America  of  sublimest  purity, 
and  in  whose  encyclopedic  head  was  a  dynamo  of 
intellect  which  was  tireless  in  its  courageous  devotion 
to  the  commonweal.  Meanwhile,  as  a  bi-product, 
through  the  fraternity  of  battle  Hamilton  had 
founded  and  galvanized  the  first  great  political 
party  in  the  United  States  by  the  force  of  his  ideals 
and  the  urge  of  his  leadership.  This  party  bor 
rowed  its  name  from  Hamilton's  "Federalist" 
which  had  expounded  its  creeds  and  charted  its 
undertakings.  -It  was  dedicated  to  Union.  It 

130 


0 

a  !' 

W)  ." 

O  £ 

1  3 

1 1 

O  ^2 


.g 


(greatest  American 

never  ceased  to  stand  watch  over  its  sovereign 
aims,  just  as  it  never  ceased  to  acknowledge 
Hamilton  as  its  inspiration  and  its  oracle. 

In  all  Hamilton's  subsequent  works,  when  he 
became  the  dominant  spirit  in  President  Washing 
ton's  two  administrations,  like  the  later  Lincoln 
he  never  ceased  to  makjsjjia^^^ 
security  oFTJnion^  It  was 

the  passion  of  his  life.  His  first  Treasury  Report, 
upon  the  subject  of  public  credit,  emphasized  his 
basic  purpose  to  solve  the  new  government's  finan 
cial  problems  so  as  best  "to  cement  more  closely 
the  Union  of  the  States."  His  National  Bank 
was  intended  even  more  to  typify  and  solidify  the 
central,  federalized  authority  of  Union  than  to 
function  as  a  financial  entity,  important  though 
the  latter  aim  was.  His  defense  of  his  National 
Bank  device,  establishing  the  comprehensive  doc 
trine  of  "implied  powers"  granted  to  the  Govern 
ment  by  the  Constitution,  did  more  to  clothe 
Union  with  the  capacities  for  self-preservation 
than  any  other  single  act  of  any  other  single  states 
man.  We  shall  never  outlive  the  precognition 
which  he  thus  displayed  as  an  unflinching  pioneer 
in  daring  to  insist  that  the  Constitution  must  be 
liberally  construed. 


<§reate$t  American 

He  was  still  thinking  and  planning  continent- 
ally,  he  was  still  The  Master  Builder  of  effective 
Union,  when  he  argued  the  good  of  the  whole 
country  against  any  section  thereof,  in  his  sapient 
"Report  on  Manufacturers"  in  which  he  set  down 
bases  upon  which  the  country  ultimately  was  to 
develop  economically  and  industrially;  still  think 
ing  and  planning  to  cement  the  indestructible 
foundations  of  one  inseparable  nation  when  he 
forced  the  assumption  of  State  war  debts  by  the 
federal  Government.  He  was  still  fighting  for 
federal  dominion  when  he  leaped  into  resistless  ac 
tion  against  anarchy  and  sectional  impudence  in 
western  Pennsylvania  and  crushed  the  "Whiskey 
Rebellion"  which  challenged  the  authority  and 
power  of  Union  to  control  its  sectors,  preserve  its 
sovereignty  and  compel  allegiance.  He  was  look 
ing  ahead  to  the  achievement  of  a  matured  Union 
which  should  be  physically  safe-guarded  against 
border-cramps  when  he,  first  among  Americans, 
planned  the  acquisition  of  Louisiana  and  the 
Floridas.  Always  and  forever  his  passion  was  to 
promote  self-reliant  nationalism.  "We  are  labor 
ing  hard  to  establish  in  this  country  principles  more 
and  more  national,  and  free  from  all  foreign  in 
gredients,  so  that  we  may  be  neither  'Greek  nor 

132 


(greatest  American 

Trojans/  but  truly  Americans,"  he  wrote  to  Rufus 
King  on  December  16,  1796.  The  first  clarion 
call  against  hyphenated  citizenship!  The  Roose- 
veltism  of  the  eighteenth  century  and  the  founda 
tion  !  Always  and  forever  he  was  vigilant  in  quick 
contest  against  any  prophecy  of  national  disin 
tegration.  Thus  it  was  that  Jefferson's  "Ken 
tucky  Resolutions,"  proposing  that  a  State  might 
invade  and  supersede  federal  jurisdiction  in  Con 
stitutional  interpretations,  brought  him  with  all 
his  relentless  zeal  into  a  brilliant  offensive  against 
a  brutally  frank  declaration  of  the  right  inherent 
in  a  State  to  secede  at  will. 

In  all  his  iron  hostility  to  any  American  imita 
tion  of  the  theories  which  the  French  Revolution 
came  to  visualize  he  was  inspired  by  this  major 
motif  of  his  life,  his  love  of  orderly,  independent 
American  Government  under  the  Constitution 
through  the  vehicle  of  Union.  Every  atom  of  his 
being  revolted  against  the  excesses  which  sunk* 
France  in  blood  and  his  constant  fear  was  that 
this  spirit  of  abandoned  respect  for  established  in 
stitutions  might  communicate  itself  to  the  United 
States  and  threaten  the  Constitutional  structure 
to  the  erection  of  which  he  had  given  his  life.  "I 
trust  there  is  enough  of  virtue  and  good  sense  m 


(greatest  American 

the  people  of  America  to  baffle  every  attempt 
against  their  prosperity,  though  masked  under 
the  specious  garb  of  an  extraordinary  zeal  for 
liberty,"  he  wrote  a  friend.  Again:  "In  a  great 
government  framed  for  durable  liberty,  not  less 
regard  must  be  paid  to  giving  the  magistrate  a 
proper  degree  of  authority  to  make  and  execute 
the  laws  with  rigor  than  to  guard  against  en 
croachments  upon  the  rights  of  the  community;  as 
too  much  power  leads  to  despotism,  too  little  leads 
to  anarchy,  and  both  eventually  to  the  ruin  of  the 
people/'  Contemplating  massacres  in  Paris  and 
the  ascendant  of  Marat' and  Robespierre,  he  wrote: 
"When  I  perceive  passion,  tumult  and  violence 
usurping  those  seats  where  reason  and  cool  de 
liberation  ought  to  prevail,  I  acknowledge  that  I 
am  glad  to  believe  there  is  no  real  resemblance 
between  what  was  the  cause  of  America  and  what  is 
the  cause  of  France;  that  the  difference  is  no  less 
great  than  that  between  liberty  and  licentious 
ness."  !  It  was  his  deathless  devotion  to  the  new 
American  system  which  inspired  this  constant 
posture  throughout  the  critical  months  when  the 
epidemics  of  French  Jacobinism  threatened  to  com 
municate  themselves  to  the  young  and  impression 
able  United  States.  f  He  was  neither  hostile  to 


(greatest  American 


France  as  a  nation,  nor  unduly  inclined  toward 
England  as  was  constantly  charged.  Simply  he 
was  passionately  pro-American,  pro-Union  and 
pro-Constitution.  He  sought  to  save  these  ideals 
from  any  foreign  jnvolvements^  Without  him, 
our  independence  of  these  entanglements  might 
have  run  a  short  and  fatal  course.  In  all  his  poli 
cies  this  purpose  was  his  ruling  inspiration.  "It 
is  more  and  more  evident,"  he  wrote  to  Washing 
ton  in  1798,  "that  the  powerful  faction  which  has 
for  years  opposed  the  Government  is  determined 
to  go  every  length  with  France.  I  am  sincere  in 
declaring  my  full  conviction,  as  the  result  of  a  long 
course  of  observation,  that  they  are  ready  to  new- 
model  our  Constitution  under  the  influence  or 
coercion  of  France.  .  .  .  This  would  be  in  sub 
stance,  whatever  it  might  be  in  name,  to  make  this 
country  a  province  of  France."  Against  all  such 
tendencies  he  was  a  perpetually  vigilant  warrior, 
always  the  first  to  scent  menace,  always  the  first 
to  enlist  against  it.  Against  the  emasculated  de 
mocracy  that  is  communism  he  was  everlastingly  at 
war.  Thus  he  did  not  hesitate  to  favor  the  famous 
Alien  and  Sedition  Acts,  in  Adams'  day,  which 
sought  to  clothe  the  Government  with  greater 
power  to  fight  this  curse.  Yet  he  was  always  as 


(greatest  American 


jealous  of  liberty  as  he  was  zealous  against  license. 
He  sought  modifications  in  the  Alien  Act,  saying: 
"Let  us  not  be  cruel  or  violent/'  Again:  "Let 
us  not  establish  a  tyranny  ;  energy  is  a  very  differ 
ent  thing  from  violence.  "  In  other  words,  though 
ready  for  any  expedients  seemingly  essential  unto 
safe-guarding  of  Government  and  Union  under 
the  Constitution,  he  was  still  the  judicially  fair- 
minded  statesman  always.  But  the  paramount 
consideration,  regardless  of  cost  or  consequence, 
was  Government  and  Union  under  an  unimpeached 
and  unimpeachable  Constitution. 

Only  at  rare  intervals  did  his  dauntless  heart 
surrender  to  cynicism.  In  one  such  mood  he 
wrote  bitterly  to  Gouverneur  Morris  on  February 
27,  1802.  "Mineis  an  odd  destiny,"  saidhe.  "Per 
haps  no  man  in  the  United  States  has  sacrificed  or 
done  more  for  the  present  Constitution  than  myself. 
...  I  am  still  laboring  to  prop  the  frail  and 
worthless  fabric.  Yet  I  have  the  murmurs  of  its 
friends  no  less  than  the  curses  of  its  foes  for  my 
reward.  .  .  The  time  may  ere  long  arrive  when 
the  minds  of  men  will  be  prepared  to  make  an  effort 
to  recover  the  Constitution,  but  the  many  cannot 
now  be  brought  to  make  a  stand  for  its  preserva 
tion.  We  must  wait  awhile."  He  felt  that  the 

136 


<©reate#t  American 

Federalists  had  been  driven  from  power,  in  the 
elections  of  1800,  by  a  demagogy  which  assidu 
ously  pandered  to  the  passions  and  the  vanities 
and  all  the  unreasoning  prejudices  of  men;  and  he 
feared  that  such  tendencies  would  lead  to  disin 
tegration  of  federal  authority  and  dissolution  of 
the  Union's  institutions.  But  a  few  weeks  later, 
typically  dauntless,  he  was  sturdily  girding  himself 
for  the  continued  battle,  with  customary  vigor  and 
constructive  plan  of  action.  "In  my  opinion/'  he 
wrote,  "the  present  Constitution  is  the  standard  to 
which  we  are  to  cling.  Under  its  banners  bona 
fide  we  must  combat  our  political  foes,  rejecting  all 
changes  but  through  the  channel  itself  provides  for 
amendments."  Thereupon  he  outlined  his  pro 
posal  that  a  protective  association  be  formed  to  be 
denominated  "The  Christian  Constitutional  So 
ciety,  its  objects  to  be,  first,  "the  support  of  the 
Christian  religion,  second,  the  support  of  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States."  That  he  thus 
should  have  linked  these  two  purposes  and  philoso 
phies  reflects  his  belief  that  atheism  was  the  hand 
maiden  to  anarchy  in  France  and  that  similar  red 
relationship  was  to  be  feared  in  the  United  States. 
Down  to  the  day  of  his  death,  literally,  he  per 
sisted  in  his  warnings  that  American  and  Union  and 


(greatest  American 

Constitutional  institutions  might  be  saved.  On 
July  10,  1804,  tne  day  preceding  his  assassination, 
he  wrote  that  "Dismemberment  of  our  empire 
will  be  a  clear  sacrifice  of  great,  positive  advantages 
without  any  counterbalancing  good,  administering 
no  relief  to  our  real  disease,  which  is  democracy,  the 
poison  of  which  by  subdivision  will  only  be  the 
more  concentrated  in  each  part  and  consequently 
the  more  virulent."  He  was  not  using  the  word 
democracy  in  the  sense  which  we  now  understand. 
He  used  it  rather  with  an  application  which  feared 
ultimate  graduation  into  what  the  modern  day 
would  more  accurately  brand  as  Bolshevism. 
Against  all  such  destruction  of  the  established 
constitutional  institutions  of  Union  he  was  the 
great,  original  American  crusader.  Indeed,  Sena 
tor  Lodge,  in  his  admirable  analysis  of  Hamilton's 
conscience,  argues  that  it  was  this  idea,  amounting 
to  no  less  than  an  obsession,  which  caused  him  to 
accept  Burr's  challenge  to  a  duel  instead  of  scorn 
ing  such  an  unenlightened  recourse.1  He  felt 
that  the  time  was  coming  when  Americans  who 
believed  in  law  and  order  and  Union  would  be 
forced  into  open  combat  with  anarchy  and 
dissolution.  He  believed  that  leadership  in 
1  Lodge's  Life  of  Hamilton. 

138 


Greatest  American 


such  a  conflict,  when  it  came,  would  be  his 
necessary  r61e  and  "he  could  not  do  this,  he 
could  not  stand  at  the  head  of  an  army,  if  it 
were  possible  for  any  man  to  cast  even  the  most 
groundless  imputation  upon  his  personal  courage." 
On  the  other  hand,  if  he  were  killed  in  such  personal 
contact  with  the  most  thoroughly  outstanding 
anti-American  of  the  time,  the  shock  would  jar  his 
country  into  a  more  initmate  and  responsive 
appreciation  of  its  dangers. 

Hamilton  himself  pronounced  much  this  same 
benediction  upon  this  final  scene  in  his  tremendous 
life  drama.  At  the  end  of  a  remarkable  statement 
which  he  penned  the  night  before  the  fatal  duel, 
he  gave  his  reason  for  meeting  Burr  in  these  words: 
"The  ability  to  be  in  future  useful,  whether  in 
resisting  mischief  or  effecting  good,  in  those  crises 
of  our  public  affairs  which  seem  likely  to  happen, 
would  probably  be  inseparable  from  a  conformity 
with  public  prejudice  in  this  particular.  " 

Unquestionably  Hamilton  died  in  the  service  of 
his  country  just  as  truly  as  though  he  had  been 
killed  at  Yorktown.  Measured  by  Hamilton's 
rugged  standard  of  patriotic  fidelities,  Burr  was 
guilty  of  treason  to  every  tenet  of  true  liberty  and 
perpetuated  Union  and  conserved  American  wel- 

i39 


(greatest  American 

fare.  So  he  fought  Burr  relentlessly  in  each  suc 
cessive  step  of  his  minatory  career.  In  the  final 
chapter  Burr  represented  northern  secession  built 
around  the  New  England  Separatist  movement. 
To  the  defeat  of  any  such  dissolution  no  man  can 
doubt  that  Hamilton  cheerfully  would  have  given 
his  life  upon  the  field  of  battle.  Having  shunned 
no  danger  or  responsibility  in  the  long  processes  of 
Union  evolution,  he  would  have  shirked  no  obliga 
tion  in  the  climax.  In  such  circumstance  his  very 
soul  was  at  the  judgment  bar.  Therefore,  when 
the  tricks  of  fate  brought  him  face  to  face,  upon 
the  field  of  honor,  with  the  most  formidable  and 
conspicuous  type  of  a  class  of  men  whose  ambitions 
if  unchecked  must,  in  his  judgment,  have  led  to  the 
ruin  of  the  state '  he  went  as  to  battle  for  his  beloved 
Union  when  he  consented  to  the  duel  with  Burr. 
He  knew,  tragically  well,  the  personal  risks  because 
his  eldest  son,  Philip,  had  already  been  killed  in  a 
similar  quarrel.  Burr,  furthermore,  was  a  veteran 
duellist,  though  never  heretofore  with  a  fatality 
charged  against  his  pistol  aim.  But  for  Hamilton 
it  was  a  nation's  war  reduced  to  simplest  terms  and 
smallest  sacrifice  which  he  was  to  fight.  To  him 
the  personal  eventuality  was  a  matter  of  small 

1  Oliver's  Alexander  Hamilton. 

140 


(greatest  American 


moment.  If  he  was  not  killed,-  he  would  at  least 
have  fore-closed  his  adversaries  from  invidious 
disparagement  of  a  spotless  courage  in  subsequent 
conflicts.  If  he  was  killed,  he  knew  that  the 
national  re-action  against  his  enemies  and  his 
faiths  would  speak  with  an  eloquence  even  greater 
than  his  own.  My  personal  opinion  is  that  he 
believed  the  latter  course  would  be  of  compara 
tively  greater  service.  Certainly  such  was  the 
event.  As  for  the  morally  bankrupt  Burr,  his 
subsequent  abortive  efforts  to  erect  a  south 
western  empire  and  his  later  trial  for  treason  prove 
perfectly  how  prescient  was  Hamilton  in  sensing 
this  high  source  of  danger  to  the  great  institutions 
of  American  Union  to  which  he  dedicated  his  life. 

John  Quincy  Adams,  perhaps  with  inherited 
venom,  has  tried  to  construe  Hamilton's  motive 
for  fighting  Burr  as  ambition.  But  Professor  Sum- 
ner's  biographical  study  of  Hamilton  truthfully 
says  :  '  '  If  a  man  fights  that  he  may  not  lose  a  chance 
to  serve  his  country  in  crises  which  he  foresees,  it 
is  not  self-evident  that  his  motive  is  ambition. 
.  .  .  He  may  be  sacrificing  his  conscientious 
opinions  to  the  highest  patriotism,  not  to  ambition." 
Such  certainly  is  the  correct  historical  verdict  upon 
this  greatest  American  loyalist  who  was  no  less  a 


Greatest  American 


martyr  to  the  tyranny  of  traitors  than  were  Lin 
coln  and  Garfield  and  McKinley  in  a  later  mourn 
ing  day.  Further,  just  as  sure  as  Lincoln  was  a 
sacrifice  to  Union,  so  was  Alexander  Hamilton. 
The  bullet  that  took  each  was  aimed  equally  at 
Columbia's  heart. 

The  great  historian,  George  Ticknor  Curtis,  has 
said  of  Hamilton:  "He  was  the  first  to  perceive 
and  develop  the  idea  of  a  real  Union  of  the  people 
of  the  United  States."1  The  whole  truth  is  that 
he  was  the  Master  Builder  of  American  Union. 

1  History  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  Stales,  by  George 
Ticknor  Curtis. 


142 


(J  , 

Jf  eberatist  ^    ^^ 

A 

'\VH-E  FEDERALIST"  was  the  name  given  to  a 
k\ 

series  of  eighty-five^rticles  apj^garirig  IP  NP.W  Vorl£_ 
publications  during  the  months  when  the  Constitu 
tion  hung  in  the  balances.  "Together  they  form 
one  of  the  great  classics  of  Government,"  Dr. 
Charles  W.  Eliot  has  declared,  prefacing  their  notice 
in  the  Harvard  Classics.  Not  only  is  this  true,  but 
far  higher  praise  might  'well  be  their  due  without 
exaggeration.  In  clarity  of  logic,  force  of  appeal, 
projection  of  vision  and  wisdom  of  advice  they 
come  down  through  the  decades  with  a  living  mes 
sage  which  in  many  respects  is  not  second  even  to 
Washington's  Farewell  Address  in  wisdom  and 
homily.  Their  influence  at  the  time  of  publica 
tion  cannot  be  over-estimated.  They  were  the 
torch  that  lighted  the  dark  and  sorely  beset  paths 
of  that  minority  of  New  York's  citizenship  which 
believed  in  the  new  Republic.  They  were  charts 
of  reassurance  to  the  new  Constitution's  friends; 
unanswerable  indictments  to  its  foes.  They  were 


(greatest  American 


as  daring  as  they  were  sound.  Without  them,  cer 
tainly  without  their  dominating  author,  New  York 
would  have  rejected  the  Constitution.  New  York's 
rejection  would  have  broken  the  Union  ere  it  was 
launched. 

All  of  these  essays  were  addressed  "to  the  people 
of  the  State  of  New  York."  They  appeared  in 
The  Independent  Journal,  The  Packet,  The  Daily 
Advertiser,  and  in  McLean's  Edition,  from  the 
autumn  of  1787  to  the  spring  of  1788.  All  of  them 
bore  one  simple  signature  —  "Publius."  But  their 
true  source  of  authorship  is  undisguised.  John 
Jay  wrote  five.  James  Madison  wrote  fourteen. 
Hamilton  and  Madison  probably  collaborated  on 
three.  The  source  of  twelve  are  in  doubt  as  to 
whether  born  of  Hamilton  or  Madison.  But  fifty- 
one,  comprising  far  the  major  portion  and  the 
major  motif,  are  the  acknowledged  product  of 
Hamilton's  incandescent  pen. 

Neither  IJasaiitQQ  nor  Madison  were  entirely 
satisfied  with  the  Constitution  in  all  its  particu 
lars.  They  had  stressed  different  views  in  the 
Convention  from  which  this  mighty  document 
originally  came.  But  when  once  the  Convention 
had  agreed  upon  its  plan  and  reported  its  consoli 
dated  structure  to  the  country,  both  Hamilton 

144 


(greatest  American 

and  Madison  buried  all  faction  and  swung  stal- 
wartly  to  the  paramount  necessity  of  securing 
ratification.  The  Federalist  was  Hamilton's  idea. 
In  conception  and  execution  it  was  essentially  his. 
Never  did  advocacy  rise  to  greater  heights.  Never 
was  higher  service  rendered  to  an  uncertain  people. 

To  sketch  the  structure  which  Hamilton  reared 
in  these  papers  is  to  reflect  the  fundaments  of  the 
United  States.  To  examine,  in  epitome,  his  creed 
is  a  valuable  digression  not  alone  for  its  testimony 
to  Hamilton's  stature,  but  also  for  its  admonition 
to  the  people  of  a  modern  day  in  which  Constitu 
tional  fidelities  are  none  too  strong  at  best. 

In  the  first  appearance  of  The  Federalist,  Ham 
ilton  set  down  this  motivating  question:  "Are 
societies  of  men  capable  of  establishing  good  gov 
ernment  from  reflection  and  choice  or  are  they 
forever  destined  to  depend  for  their  political  con 
stitutions  on  accident  and  force?"  He  pitched 
his  appeal  upon  planes  involving  the  higher  sensi 
bilities.  He  brushed  aside  all  ascription  of  sordid 
motives  to  his  opponents  and  condemned  them 
only  of  "the  honest  errors  of  minds  led  astray  by 
preconceived  jealousies  and  fears."  This  toleration 
which  he  granted,  arid  never  forsook  except  in 
those  few  chapters  wherein  he  lashed  the  pretense 

145 


<§reate*t  American 

of  a  parallel  between  Presidents  and  Kings,  he 
besought  from  hi s  opponents.  ' '  We  are  not  always 
sure/'  said  he,  "that  those  who  advocate  the  truth 
are  influenced  by  purer  principles  than  their 
antagonists.  In  politics,  as  in  religion,  it  is  equally 
absurd  to  aim  at  making  proselytes  by  fire  and 
sword.  Heresies  in  either  can  rarely  be  cured  by 
persecution/' 

Yet,  with  subtle  fling,  he  stripped  the  demagog 
and  laid  him  bare.  "A  dangerous  ambition  more 
often  lurks  behind  the  specious  mask  of  zeal  for  the 
rights  of  the  people  than  under  the  forbidding  ap 
pearance  of  zeal  for  the  firmness  and  efficiency  of 
Government.  Of  those  men  who  have  overturned 
the  liberties  of  Republics,  the  greatest  number 
have  begun  their  careers  by  paying  an  obsequious 
court  to  the  people;  commencing  demagogs,  and 
ending  tyrants."  How  true  this  philosophy  was 
and  is  can  be  demonstrated,  yesterday  and  today, 
by  consulting  the  most  casual  historical  reminiscence 
and  contemporary  experience. 

In  the  sixth  Federalist,  Hamilton  began  to  build 
the  structure  of  his  argument.  In  that  day,  as  in 
this,  theory  and  practice  were  at  constant  odds. 
The  first  task  undertaken  was  to  persuade  the 
idealists,  who  refused  to  consent  that  prospects  of 

146 


(greatest  American 

menace  surrounded  the  loose  but  liberated  colonies, 
that  "Utopian  speculations"  were  a  dangerous 
dream.  (The  faithful  chronicler  must  concede  a 
striking  parallel  between  this  argument  and  the 
declaration  of  Senator  Henry  Cabot  Lodge  122 
years  later,  opening  his  argument  against  the 
Versailles  Covenant;  "Unshared  idealism  is  a 
menace".)  To  anticipate  no  frictions  and  no  need 
to  guard  against  them,  argued  Hamilton,  was  "to 
disregard  the  uniform  course  of  human  events  and 
to  set  at  defiance  the  accumulated  experience  of 
ages."  He  sounded  reveille  from  "the  deceitful 
dream  of  a  golden  age."  He  pleaded  the  neces- 
ity  "to  adopt  as  a  practical  maxim  for  the  direction 
of  our  political  conduct  that  we,  as  well  as  the 
other  inhabitants  of  the  globe,  are  yet  remote  from 
the  happy  empire  of  perfect  wisdom  and  perfect 
virtue."  He  challenged  "visionary  or  designing 
'men  who  stand  ready  to  advocate  the  paradox  of 
perpetual  peace." 

The  whole  purpose  in  this  and  three  subsequent  A 
issues  of  The  Federalist  was  to  emphasize  the 
intensely  practical  need  of  a  "  Conf ederative 
Republic"  (fruit  of  the  Constitution)  which  coulc 
serve  as  a  defense  against  aggression  from  abroad 
and,  at  home,  against  "secret  jealousy  whid 

H7 


<®reate*t  American 

j  disposes  all  states  to  aggrandize  themselves  at  the 

(expense  of  their  neighbors." 

Hamilton  sketched  the  sources  of  war  and 
showed  how  small  a  friction  can  pyramid  into  a 
casus  belli;  how  comparatively  inconsequential 
an  agency — the  bigotry  of  a  de  Maintenon,  the 
petulance  of  a  Marlborough,  the  cabals  of  a 
de  Pompadour — may  graduate  into  embattled 
disaster.  He  showed  that  Republics — Sparta, 
Athens,  Rome,  Carthage — are  as  susceptible  to 
war  as  monarchies.  In  all  these  references,  he 
disclosed  his  marvelous  grasp  upon  the  details  of 
history.  Indeed,  diverging  for  a  moment  it  must 
be  said  that  in  this  complete  Federalist  exhibit, 
Hamilton  displayed  a  working  scholarship  of  rare 
extent.  The  Achaean  League,  the  Belgic  Con 
federacy,  the  Protestant  Alliance  of  Berne,  the 
Catholic  Alliance  of  Luzerne,  the  League  of  Cam- 
bray,  the  Lycian  Confederacy,  the  Polish  Diet, 
the  Union  of  Utrecht  were  handy  references.  The 
^Etoliansr-  the  Cosmi,  the  Lacedaemonians,  the 
Samnians,  the  Phocians — all  paraded  Federalist 
pages  in  their  proper  place.  Draco,  Pericles, 
Grotius,  Scipio,  Plutarch,  Plato,  Callicrates,  Solon, 
Lycurgus,  Socrates,  Theseus,  Xerxes — all  occupied 
their  potential  station.  The  Treaty  of  Hanover, 

148 


Greatest  Smertcan 

the  Treaty  of  Westphalia,  the  Treaty  of  Savoy, 
were  all  familiar  incidents.  In  a  word,  knowledge 
was  never  greater  power  than  in  the  possession  of 
this  master. 

He  was  arguing  the  strength  of  Union  as  a  com 
mon  defense  at  home  and  abroad.  He  pleaded  that 
the  result  of  a  loose  confederacy  would  be  gradually 
"to  entangle  America  in  all  the  pernicious  laby 
rinths  of  European  politics  and  wars."  On  the 
other  hand,  said  he:  "If  we  are  wise  enough  to 
preserve  the  Union,  we  may  for  ages  enjoy  an  ad 
vantage  similar  to  that  of  an  insulated  situation. 
Europe  is  at  a  great  distance  from  us.  Her  col 
onies  in  our  vicinity  will  likely  continue  too  much 
disproportioned  in  strength  to  be  able  to  give  us 
any  dangerous  annoyance."  The  alternative  he 
pictured  was  foreign  intrigue  encouraged  by  a 
divided  America,  each  independent  sector  of  which 
would'be  too  weak  and  too  jealous  of  its  neighbors 
to  resist  the  temptation  of  seeking  selfish  advan 
tage  through  alien  alliance.  This  same  division, 
inviting  trouble  abroad,  he  argued,  would  en 
courage  "the  vices  of  constant  domestic  faction 
and  insurrection  at  home."  Against  "an  infinity 
of  little,  jealous,  clashing,  tumultuous  common 
wealths,  the  wretched  nurseries  of  unceasing  dis- 

149 


(greatest  American 

cord,"  he  flung  the  whole  force  of  his  compelling 
logic. 

Here  was  sounded  the  great  plea  for  Union — 
the  first  tremendous,  consecutive  argument  for 
American  solidarity.  He  was  the  greatest  pioneer 
advocate  of  Union,  speaking  as  Lincoln  did  seven 
decades  later,  and  clothing  his  allegiance  in  an 
equally  uncompromising  fealty.  From  beginning 
to  end,  The  Federalist  set  down  the  charts  which 
must  have  been  Lincoln's  constant  encouragement 
and  reference  and  bulwark  when  the  second  test  of 
the  Union  came.  Though  it  be  a  confessed  an 
achronism,  Hamilton  was  the  Lincoln  of  his  times — 
the  first  Lincoln  in  the  story  of  the  United  States. 

"Let  the  thirteen  states,"  he  wrote  in  the 
eleventh  Federalist,  "bound  together  in  a  strict 
and  indissoluble  Union,  concur  in  erecting  one 
great  American  system,  superior  to  the  control  of  all 
trans-Atlantic  force  or  influence."  These  sepa 
rate  State  organizations,  he  declared,  must  be  "in 
perfect  subordination  to  the  general  authority  of 
j:he  Union."  He  charged  that  his  adversaries 
axtGniaF~things  repugnant  and  irreconcilable — at 
an  augmentation  of  federal  authority  without  a 
diminution  of  state  authority — at  sovereignty  in 
the  Union,  and  complete  independence  in  the  mem 

150 


(greatest  American 

bers."  He  hurled  the  whole  might  of  his  attack 
against  this  fallacy.  It  was  a  case  of  choice,  he 
pointed  out  in  the  fifteenth  Federalist,  between  a 
mere  alliance  or  "adherence  to  the  design  of  a 
national  government." 

He  insisted  that  the  Constitution's  enemies  be 
sought  a  type  of  Union  in  which  the  central  govern 
ment  has  no  authority  over  the  persons  of  its 
citizens  who  are  answerable  only  to  the  sovereignty 
of  their  states.  He  insisted  that  such  a  loose  con 
federation  was  comparable  with  "feudal  baronies." 
He  insisted  upon  putting  the  Union  above  th 
individual  State  and  prophesied — how  wisely  ] 
tory  unhappily  recorded  later — that  any  other 
scheme  of  things  would  invite  a  grouping  of 
secessional  states  bent  upon  war  and  "the  dis 
solution  of  the  Union."  He  demanded  an  indis-j 
putable  central  power  "to  exact  obedience"  and 
to  punish  disobedience  and  to  "secure  a  sanc 
tion  to  its  laws."  He  answered  the  "virulent 
invective"  and  "petulant  declamation"  aimed 
at  the  Constitution's  express  provision,  declaring 
it  and  the  laws  and  the  treaties  made  in  pursu 
ance  thereof,  "the  supreme  law  of  the  land, 
anything  in  the  constitution  or  laws  of  any  state 
to  the  contrary  notwithstanding."  With  cool 


<&reate*t  American 

logic,  in  the  thirty-third  Federalist,  he  demon 
strated  the  essential  implication  of  this  authority 
even  though  not  expressed,  and  added,  propheti 
cally:  "the  Convention  probably  foresaw  that  the 
danger  which  most  threatens  our  political  welfare 
is  that  state  governments  will  finally  sap  the 
foundations  of  the  Union,  and  thought  it  neces 
sary,  in  so  cardinal  a  point,  to  leave  nothing  to 
construction." 

From  the  beginning  to  the  end,  The  Federalist 
rings..-with-;this  apostrophe  to  Union.  Lincoln,  in  a 
later  age,  became  the  great,  outstanding  exponent 
whom  modern  opinion  exalts  as  the  greatest  advo 
cate  that  Union  ever  had.  He  wrote,  he  preached, 
he  served  wonderfully  to  this  tremendous  end  and 
no  acknowledgment  of  debt  to  him,  on  this  ac 
count,  can  be  too  great.  It  is  no  detraction  from 
his  stature  to  raise  another  advocate  of  Union  by 
his  side.  It  is  merely  the  just  verdict  of  history  to 
say  that  the  Hamilton  crusades  of  1787-88  did,  in 
the  creation,  what  the  Lincoln  crusades  of  1860-65 
did  in  the  preservation — each  a  noble,  daring, 
immortal  service  inexorably  prosecuted  against 
tremendous  odds. 

In  the  earlier  Federalists,  Hamilton  sought  to 
impress  his  countrymen  with  the  idea  that  a  solid 

152 


American 

federation  would  relieve  them  of  excessive  burdens 
by  way  of  supporting  armies  since  it  would  obviate 
standing  defenses  by  one  state  or  one  group  of 
states  against  others.  But  he  took  good  care  that 
these  observations  should  not  encourage  a  belief 
that  the  new  Union  itself  could  stand  defenseless. 
In  terms  of  modern  application,  he  believed  in  ^ 
"preparedness."  In  terms  of  modern  application 
fully  as  pertinently  as  of  that  day,  he  presciently 
bespoke  a  nation's  common  sense  necessities  in 
1780,  in  1920  or  in  any  year  to  come.  "Let  us 
recollect,"  said  he,  in  the  thix*y-feu£tk  Federalist 
"that  peace  or  war  will  not  always  be  left  to  our 
option;  that  however  moderate  or  unambitious  we 
may  be,  we  cannot  count  upon  the  moderation  or 
hope  to  extinguish  the  ambitions  of  others." 
Arguing  for  an  adequate  Navy  as  well  as  an  Army, 
he  declared:  "Even  the  rights  of  neutrality  will 
only  be  respected  when  they  are  defended  by  an 
adequate  power.  A  nation,  despicable  by  its 
weakness,  forfeits  even  the  privilege  of  being 
neutral."  His  wisdom  bridged  a  century  and  more 
to  be  vindicated  by  the  experiences  of  his  beloved 
United  States  in  the  throes  of  World  War.  Theo 
dore  Roosevelt,  the  late  Augustus  Gardner  and''' 
Major-General  Leonard  Wood  were  but  fighting 


American 

Hamilton's  battles  over  again — preserving  Hamil 
ton's  advice  and  warnings  in  renaissance — when 
they  sought  to  arouse  America  from  pacifism. 
Another  anachronism:  but  in  respect  to  this  issue, 
Hamilton  was  the  Roosevelt  of  his  time.  "The 
hope  of  impunity,"  he  declared  in  the  twenty- 
seventh  Federalist,  "is  a  strong  incitement  to 
sedition;  the  dread  of  punishment  a  proportion 
ately  strong  discouragement  to  it."  Then,  a 
chapter  later  with  cutting  phrase  he  ridiculed  the 
pacifism  of  those  early  days — "the  reveries  of  those 
political  doctors  whose  sagacity  disdains  the  ad 
monitions  of  experimental  instruction"  and 
practical  experience. 

This  was  not  militarism  for  which  he  contended. 
It  was,  on  the  contrary,  a  specific  argument  for 
defense  of  a  democratic  character.  He  believed 
in  democracy's  dependence  upon  mass-democracy, 
upon  a  trained  citizen  reserve,  for  its  defense. 
"Modern  circumstances,"  said  he,  "have  rendered 
disciplined  armies,  distinct  from  the  body  of  the 
citizens,  the  inseparable  companions  of  frequent 
hostility."  But  this  insight  into  the  truth  of  rela 
tive  defense  values  did  not  blind  him  to  practical 
necessities.  A  standing  army  in  time  of  peace — 
"small  but  no  less  real  because  it  is  small" — was 


Ws&Mj  /^/j 


American 


acknowledged  indispensable;  and  Hamilton  liter 
ally  riddled  the  complaints  of  those  who  cringed 
before  the  proposed  Constitution's  provisions  upon 
this  score.  Politely,  but  perfectly,  in  tha  foventy- 
HiourtkPcdcralistJie  exploded  the  hostile  arguments 
of  those  whose  course  "is  dictated  either  by  a  de 
liberate  intention  to  deceive  or  by  the  over-flowings 
of  a  zeal  too  intemperate  to  be  ingenuous."  His 
insistence  was  that  the  Constitution  did  and  must 
give  the  central  government  power  to  defend  as  well 
as  the  responsibility  for  defending  common  federal 
interests.  That  this  power,  under  the  Constitu 
tion,  could  become  a  menace,  he  strenuously 
denied.  He  pointed  out,  on  the  other  side  of  this 
argument,  that  the  Constitution  gave  Congress 
exclusive  power  over  appropriations  for  the  Army, 
required  the  exercise  of  this  authority  every  two 
years,  and  thus  forced  a  biennial  review  of  the  na 
tion's  military  policy.  He  argued  that  a  national 
control  of  the  Army  was  safer  than  State  control 
over  numerous  armies,  because  State  control  would 
be  unchecked  whereas  the  States  will  always  be 
jealous  of  this  national  power  and  the  people, 
therefore,  will  stand  constant  guard  against  its 
misuse.  "The  people  are  always  most  in  danger," 
he  wrote,  in  the  twenty-fifth  Federalist,  "when  the 


(Sreatetft  American 

means  of  injuring  their  rights  are  in  the  possession  of 
those  of  whom  they  entertain  the  least  suspicion.*1 
Was  ever  terser  philosophy  put  into  trite  epigram? 
Then,  in  a  climax  of  crushing  logic,  he  disclosed  the 
absurdity  of  failing  to  provide  an  adequate,  com 
mon,  unified,  federal  defense.  He  showed  that 
the  necessity  for  such  defense  would  inevitably 
arise  and  that  when  it  did,  public  necessity  would 
always  find  a  way  to  accomplish  its  exigent  require 
ments,  regardless  of  "parchment  barriers"  which 
the  fearful  might  undertake  to  erect  constitution 
ally.  This  brought  him  to  one  of  the  profoundest 
of  his  gems  of  wisdom — a  rule  of  conduct  which 
might  well,  in  this  later  century,  be  blazed  across 
the  theater  of  every  legislative  body  in  the  land. 
"Wise  politicians  will  be  cautious  about  fettering 
the  government  with  restrictions  that  cannob  be 
observed,  because  they  know  that  every  breach  of 
the  fundamental  laws,  though  dictated  by  neces 
sity,  impairs  that  sacred  reverence  which  ought  to 
be  maintained  in  the  breasts  of  rulers  towards  the 
Constitution  of  a  country,  and  forms  a  precedent 
for  other  breaches  where  the  same  plea  of  necessity 
does  not  exist  at  all,  or  is  less  urgent  and  palpable." 
With  the  same  painstaking  care  "Publius"  dis 
cussed  America's  economic  situation.  He  ar- 

156 


(greatest  American 


a  r/uOM 


raigned  existing  colonial  conditions  wherein  no 
factor  of  "poverty,  disorder  and  insignificance" 
is  absent  from  "the  dark  catalogue  of  our  public 
misfortunes."  To  contemplate  this  picture  in  its 
verity  is  to  gain  a  new  appreciation  of  the  extent 
of  task  for  which  the  founders  of  our  Constitu 
tional  government  were  responsible — a  greater  task, 
involving  greater  native  obstacles  and  discourage 
ments,  than  has  confronted  America  in  any  subse 
quent  era,  desperate  and  trying  though  subsequent 
crises  proved  to  be. 

Hamilton  demanded  an  American  merchant 
marine  so  that  we  might  enjoy  "active  commerce 
in  our  own  bottoms";  and  he  argued,  in  these 
trade  concerns,  that  the  power  of  unity,  provided 
through  the  Constitution,  alone  could  "enable  us 
to  bargain  with  great  advantage  for  commercial 
privileges."  "We  may  hope  ere  long,"  he  wrote 
in  one  of  his  typical  flashes  of  foresight,  "to  become 
the  arbiter  of  Europe  in  America,  and  to  be  able 
to  incline  the  balance  of  European  competitions  in 
this  part  of  the  world  as  our  interest  may  dictate." 

He  argued  the  economy  in  cost  of  government 
which  a  consolidated  nation  would  permit.  His 
opposition  was  proposing  three  confederacies  in 
stead  of  one.  The  most  favored  opposition  plan 


(greatest  American 


was  a  grouping  of  the  four  northern  states,  the 
four  middle  states  and  the  five  southern  states  into 
separate  Unions.  He  demonstrated  that  the  struc 
ture  of  federal  government  for  any  one  of  these 
smaller  Unions  would  be  practically  as  great  and 
as  expensive  as  one  government  for  all. 

He  insisted  upon  the  acceptance  of  a  federal 
taxation  authority.  "A  government  ought  to 
contain  in  itself,"  he  wrote  in  the  thirty-first 
Federalist,  "  every  power  requisite  to  the  full 
accomplishment  of  the  objects  committed  to  its 
care  and  to  the  complete  execution  of  the  trusts  for 
which  it  is  responsible,  free  from  every  other  con 
trol  but  a  regard  to  the  public  good  and  to  the 
sense  of  the  people.  "  Again,  in  the  thirty-sixth 
Federalist:  "  As  I  know  nothing  to  exempt  this  por 
tion  of  the  globe  from  the  common  calamities  that 
have  befallen  other  parts  of  it,  I  acknowledge  my 
aversion  to  every  project  that  is  calculated  to  dis 
arm  the  government  of  a  single  weapon,  which  in 
any  possible  contingency  might  be  usefully 
employed  for  the  general  defense  and  security." 

The  forty-ninth  to  the  fifty-eighth  Federalists 
inclusive  are  attributed  to  an  unfixed  authorship  — 
either  Hamilton  or  Madison.  Some  sections, 
however,  are  so  masterfully  clear  and  convincing 

158 


(Greatest  American 


as  to  recall  the  genius  of  Hamilton  as  disclosed  in 
the  other  papers  of  which  he  is  the  admitted  source. 
After  arguing  the  Constitution's  wisdom  in  holding 
each  of  the  three  independent  branches  of  the 
government  in  legitimate  check,  these  particular 
papers  devote  themselves  to  a  defense  of  the  struc 
ture  proposed  for  the  House  of  Representatives. 
The  advisability  of  a  two-year  tenure  argued  against 
the  prejudice  of  the  times  which  largely  favored 
one-year  terms  consonant  with  the  practice  in 
existing  state  legislatures.  (An  idiom  of  the  day 
declared  that  "where  annual  elections  end,  tyranny 
begins.  ")  The  census  basis  for  apportioning  repre 
sentatives  —  with  slaves  counted  as  persons  —  was 
defended  with  a  zeal,  a  humanity  and  a  logic  which 
prophetically  insisted  that  these  negroes  were  not 
1  'property"  alone  but  partook  of  human  attributes 
and  station. 

Discussions  as  to  the  number  of  Representatives 
in  Congress,  originally  fixed  as  sixty-five,  are  particu 
larly  potent  in  the  light  of  later-day  developments 
upon  this  score.  The  popular  fear  then  was  that 
the  House  would  be  too  small  and  "Publius"  was 
put  to  the  necessity  of  proving  that  its  size  would 
inevitably  increase  with  succeeding  decades,  pursu 
ant  to  new  census  counts.  But  against  a  too  rapid 


Cfjc  Greatest  American 

stride  in  this  direction,  The  Federalist  dared  to 
raise  a  voice  which  should  be  heeded  in  these  modern 
times  since  our  modern  problem  has  swung  to  this 
opposite  extreme.  Just  as  Hamilton  promised,  the 
size  of  the  House  has  increased  with  every  decen 
nial  reapportionment  with  the  exception  of  1840. 
Though  the  unit  of  representation  has  jumped 
from  30,000  at  the  time  of  the  Constitution's  adop 
tion  to  211,877  in  I9I°>  the  size  of  the  House  has 
jumped  from  65  to  435  members.  (A  century  and 
a  quarter  ago  Hamilton  wrote  of  the  day  when  400 
members  might  sit  in  the  lower  Congress !)  We  are 
once  more  in  this  same  process  in  1921.  We  pri 
vately  confess  an  opinion  that  we  are  sacrificing 
efficiency  to  size,  but  we  publicly  continue  to 
pursue  the  course  of  least  resistance.  These  words 
from  The  Federalist — wise  in  their  day,  even  wiser 
in  their  prophecy — should  be  read  on  the  floor  of 
Congress  upon  every  future  decennial  occasion  of  a 
reappointment : 

"The  truth  is,  that  in  all  cases  a  certain  number 
(of  Representatives)  at  least  seems  necessary  to 
secure  the  benefits  of  free  consultation  and  dis 
cussion,  and  to  guard  against  too  easy  a  combina 
tion  for  improper  purposes;  as,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  number  ought  at  most  to  be  kept  within  a  cer- 

160 


(Sreatestf  American 


tain  limit,  in  order  to  avoid  the  confusion  and  in 
temperance  of  a  multitude.  In  all  very  numerous 
assemblies,  of  whatever  character  composed,  pas 
sion  never  fails  to  wrest  the  scepter  from  reason. 
...  In  all  legislative  assemblies  the  greater  the 
number  composing  them  may  be,  the  fewer  will  be 
the  men  who  will  in  fact  direct  their  proceedings. 
In  the  first  place,  the  more  numerous  an  assembly 
may  be,  of  whatever  character  composed,  the 
greater  is  known  to  be  the  ascendancy  of  passion 
over  reason.  In  the  next  place,  the  larger  the 
number,  the  greater  will  be  the  proportion  of  mem 
bers  of  limited  information  and  weak  capacities. 
.  .  .  The  more  multitudinous  a  representative 
assembly  may  be  rendered,  the  more  it  will 
partake  of  the  infirmities  incident  to  collective 
meetings  of  people.  Ignorance  will  be  the  dupe 
of  cunning,  and  passion  the  slave  of  sophistry  and 
declamation.  The  people  can  never  err  more  than 
in  supposing  that  by  multiplying  their  representa 
tives  beyond  a  certain  limit,  they  strengthen  the 
barrier  against  the  government  of  a  few.  .  .  . 
The  countenance  of  the  government  may  become 
more  democratic,  but  the  soul  that  animates  it  will 
become  more  oligarchic.  The  machine  will  be 
enlarged,  but  the  fewer,  and  often  the  more 
11  161 


(greatest  American 

secret,  will  be  the  springs  by  which  its  motions 
are  directed. " 

Hamilton  then  proceeded  to  answer  "the  credu 
lous  votaries  of  State  power"  who  feared  to  allow 
the  central  government  the  right  to  alter  regulations, 
except  as  to  the  places  for  choosing  Senators,  that 
shall  be  made  by  State  legislatures  in  prescribing 
the  times,  places  and  manner  of  holding  congres 
sional  elections.  He  laid  down  the  cardinal  truth, 
once  more,  that  ''every  government  ought  to  con 
tain  in  itself  the  means  of  its  own  preservation"; 
demonstrated  that  a  failure  or  refusal  on  the  part 
of  the  States  to  provide  or  to  operate  electoral 
machinery,  could  result  in  a  negation  of  the  Con 
stitution;  and  insisted,  unanswerably,  that  "if  the 
State  legislatures  were  to  be  invested  with  an  ex 
clusive  power  of  regulating  these  elections,  every 
period  of  making  them  would  be  a  delicate  cri 
sis  in  the  national  situation,  which  might  issue 
in  a  dissolution  of  the  Union."  Like  Lincoln, 
who  seven  decades  later  followed  Hamiltonian 
precepts  in  making  the  maintenance  of  Union 
paramount  to  all  else  in  the  crises  of  Civil  War, 
Hamilton's  constant  plea  and  relentless  aspira 
tion  was  an  indivisible  and  impregnable  federal 
solidarity. 

162 


(greatest  American 


I 
The  authorship  of  Hamilton,  Madison  and  Jay 

mingles  together  from  the  sixty-second  to  the 
sixty-sixth  Federalists  inclusive  ;  but  the  admitted 
authorship  of  Hamilton  in  the  last  two  and  prob 
ably  in  the  first  two,  continues  to  justify  history's 
habit  of  counting  "Publius"  and  Hamilton  as  one. 
In  these  chapters,  the  Senate  and  its  prerogatives 
were  discussed.  The  method  of  electing  Senators 
(by  State  legislatures)  was  dismissed  with  least 
attention  and  may,  therefore,  reasonably  be  said  to 
have  weighed  with  least  controversial  importance. 
This  method  has  since  been  changed.  In  other 
respects,  the  Senatorial  system,  recommended  by 
the  Founders,  still  stands  unimpaired.  But  the 
intervening  century  has  not  sufficed  to  suspend 
popular  arguments  regarding  it.  Since  the  same 
prejudice  which  Hamilton  contested  in  1788  still 
frequently  counsels  abolition  of  the  Senate  or 
curtailment  of  its  powers  in  1920,  it  is  worth  while 
to  examine  the  logic  which  saved  a  Senate  then 
and  which  should  save  it  now  and  always. 

In  epitome,  The  Federalist  set  down  the  follow 
ing  distinct  reasons  for  such  a  Senate  as  the 
American  Constitution  provides: 

(i)  "It  is  a  misfortune  incident  to  republi 
can  government,  though  in  less  degree  than  to 

163 


(greatest  American 

other  governments,  that  those  who  administer  it 
may  forget  their  obligations  to  their  constituents, 
and  prove  unfaithful  to  their  important  trust.  A 
Senate  doubles  the  security  to  the  people,  by  re 
quiring  the  concurrence  of  two  distinct  bodies  in 
schemes  of  usurpation  or  perfidy,  where  the  ambi 
tion  or  corruption  of  one  would  otherwise  be 
sufficient. " 

(2)  The  necessity  of  a  Senate  is  indicated  "by 
the  propensity  of  all  single  and  numerous  assemblies 
to  the  impulse  of  sudden  and  violent  passions,  and 
to  be  seduced  by  factious  leaders  into  intemperate 
and  pernicious  resolutions.     A  body  which  is  to 
correct  this  infirmity  ought  itself  to  be  free  from  it, 
and  consequently  ought  to  be  less  numerous.     It 
ought,  moreover,  to  possess  great  firmness,  and 
consequently  ought  to  hold  its  authority  by  a 
tenure  of  considerable  duration/' 

(3)  Another  defect  to  be  supplied  by  the  Senate 
lies  in  a  "want  of  due  acquaintance  and  experience 
with  the  objects  and  principles  of  legislation — a 
want  bound  to  be  evident  in  greater  degree  in  an 
assembly  (like  the  House  of  Representatives)  con 
tinued  in  appointment  for  a  short  time.     What  are 
all  the  repealing,  explaining,  and  amending  laws, 
which  fill  and  disgrace  our  voluminous  codes,  but 

164 


(greatest  American 


so  many  monuments  of  deficient  wisdom;  so  many 
impeachments  exhibited  by  each  succeeding  against 
each  preceding  session;  so  many  admonitions  to 
the  people  of  the  value  of  those  aids  which  may 
be  expected  from  a  well-constituted  Senate?" 

(4)  The   mutability    in    the   public    councils, 
arising  from  a  rapid  succession  of  new  members, 
however  qualified  they  may  be,  "points  out,  in 
the  strongest  manner,  the  necessity  of  some  stable 
institution  in  the  government.     The  calamitous 
effects  of  a  mutable  policy  of  government  permeate 
its  every  phase,  foreign  and  domestic." 

(5)  A     Senate     establishes     our     "  national 
character." 

(6)  A  Senate  establishes  continuity  of  govern 
ment.     "An  assembly  (House  of  Representatives) 
elected  for  so  short  a  term  as  to  be  unable  to  pro 
vide  more  than  one  or  two  links  in  a  chain  of 
measures,  on  which  the  general  welfare  may  essen 
tially  depend,  ought  not  to  be  answerable  for  the 
final  result,  any  more  than  a  steward  or  tenant, 
engaged  for  one  year,  could  be  justly  made  to  an 
swer  for  places  or  improvements  which  could  not 
be  accomplished  in  less  than  half  a  dozen  years." 

(7)  Such   an   institution   as   the   Senate  may 
sometimes  be  necessary  as  a  defense  to  the  people 

165 


(greatest  American 

against  their  own  temporary  errors  and  delusions. 
"There  are  particular  moments  in  public  affairs 
when  the  people,  stimulated  by  some  irregular 
passion,  or  some  illicit  advantage,  or  misled  by  the 
artful  misrepresentations  of  interested  men,  may 
call  for  measures  which  they  themselves  will  after 
wards  be  the  most  ready  to  lament  and  condemn. 
In  these  critical  moments,  how  salutary  will  be  the 
interference  of  some  temperate  and  respectable 
body  of  citizens  in  order  to  check  the  misguided 
career,  and  to  suspend  the  blow  meditated  by  the 
people  against  themselves,  until  reason,  justice 
and  truth  can  regain  their  authority  over  the  public 
mind?  What  bitter  anguish  would  not  the  people 
of  Athens  have  often  escaped  if  their  government 
had  contained  so  provident  a  safeguard  against 
the  tyranny  of  their  own  passions?  Popular  liberty 
might  have  escaped  the  indelible  reproach  of  de 
creeing  to  the  same  citizens  the  hemlock  on  one 
day  and  statues  on  the  next.  Liberty  may  be  en 
dangered  by  the  abuses  of  liberty  as  well  as  by 
the  abuses  of  power. " 

In  modern  experience  we  have  seen  this  logic 
justified.  If  we  may  assume  that  the  ultimate 
electoral  refusal  of  the  people  to  endorse  The  Cove 
nant  of  The  League  of  Nations  in  all  its  pristine 

1 66 


(greatest  American 

strictures  was  a  correct  verdict,  then  nothing  but 
the  existence  of  a  Senate  with  concurrent  treaty- 
making  powers,  operating  exactly  as  Hamilton 
described,  saved  America  from  the  grave  error 
of  yielding  to  an  initial  "passion"  which  loudly  and 
overwhelmingly  demanded  unquestioning  and  un 
reserved  American  obeisance  when  President  Wilson 
first  brought  his  Covenant  home  and  presented 
his  appeal. 

From  the  sixty-seventh  to  the  seventy-seventh 
Federalists,  Hamilton  disarmed  the  advocates  of 
a  plural  executive  power  and  particularly  indicted 
those  adversaries  who  insisted  upon  pretending  an 
affinity  between  the  proposed  Presidency  of  the 
United  States  and  the  royal  prerogatives  of  an 
unlimited  King.  ' '  The  image  of  Asiatic  despotism 
and  voluptuousness,'*  he  wrote,  "have  scarcely 
been  wanting  to  crown  the  exaggerated  scene.  We 
have  been  taught  to  tremble  at  the  terrific  visages 
of  murdering  janizaries,  and  to  blush  at  the  un 
veiled  mysteries  of  a  future  seraglio.  ...  I 
hesitate  not  to  submit  it  to  the  decision  of  any 
candid  and  honest  adversary,  whether  language 
can  furnish  epithets  of  too  much  asperity,  for  so 
shameless  and  so  prostitute  an  attempt  to  impose 
on  the  citizens  of  America." 

167 


(greatest  American 

We  of  this  modern  day  can  scarcely  comprehend 
the  lengths  to  which  Hamilton's  opponents  went 
in  "contriving  to  pervert  the  public  opinion"; 
although  to  comprehend  them  is  to  comprehend 
the  stupendous  power  of  the  frail,  young  statesT 
man  who  bore  the  brunt  of  the  battle  that 
wore  these  opponents  down.  Hamilton  took  as 
his  major  and  typical  example  the  pretense 
that  under  the  Constitution  the  President  would 
have  the  power  to  fill  casual  vacancies  in  the 
Senate.  Through  intervening  years  we  have  seen 
Senate  vacancies  filled  so  many  times  by  action 
of  a  Governor's  interim  appointment  or  a  state 
legislature's  franchise,  that  we  accept  the  process 
as  being  incontestably  patent.  Yet  Hamilton  had 
to  plead  witk  obdurate  New  Yorkers  who  in 
sisted  otherwise  in  their  blind  aim  to  clothe  their 
imaginary  White  House  throne  and  scepter  with 
incontinent  authority. 

Much  consideration  is  given  in  these  chapters 
to  the  presidential  tenure  and  its  license  of  "  re- 
eligibility"  to  repeated  elections.  Hamilton's 
observations  upon  this  score  are  doubly  illumi 
nating  in  light  of  formidable  latter-day  agitation * 

1  Formally  expressed  in  the  Democratic  National 
Platform  of  1912. 

1 68 


&merican 


for  a  lengthened  single  term  and  a  barrier  against 
"re-eligibility."  Upon  this  latter  proposition, 
The  Federalist  said: 

"This  exclusion  would  have  effects  which  would 
be  for  the  most  part  rather  pernicious  than  salu 
tary.  One  ill  effect  of  this  exclusion  would  be  a 
diminution  of  the  inducements  to  good  behaviour. 
.  .  .  Another  ill  effect  would  be  the  temptation 
to  sordid  views,  to  peculation  and,  in  some  in 
stances,  to  usurpation.  .  .  .  That  experience 
is  the  parent  of  wisdom  is  an  adage  the  truth  of 
which  is  recognized  by  the  wisest  as  well  as  the 
simplest  of  mankind.  What  more  desirable  or 
more  essential  than  this  quality  in  the  government 
of  nations?  Can  it  be  wise  to  put  this  quality 
under  the  ban  of  the  Constitution,  and  to  declare 
that  the  moment  it  is  acquired  its  possessor  shall 
be  compelled  to  abandon  the  station  in  which  it 
was  acquired,  and  to  which  it  is  adapted?  .  .  . 
A  fourth  ill  effect  of  the  exclusion  would  be  the 
banishing  men  from  stations  in  which,  in  certain 
emergencies  of  the  State,  their  presence  might  be 
of  the  greatest  moment  to  the  public  interest  or 
safety.  ...  A  fifth  ill  effect  would  be  that  it 
would  operate  as  a  constitutional  interdiction  of 
stability  in  the  administration." 

169 


(greatest  American 

Hamilton  argued  against  "necessitating  a  change 
of  men" — against  " disabling  the  people  to  con 
tinue  in  office  men  who  had  entitled  themselves 
to  approbation  and  confidence. "  Who  shall  say, 
today,  that  he  was  not  wise  in  his  generation, 
wiser  even  than  modern  reformers  who  would 
borrow  from  the  very  purposes  and  arguments 
against  which  he  fought?  Who  shall  say  mat -a 
tradition  and  a  habit  against  a  prolonged  presi 
dency  is  not  better  and  safer  than  a  constitutional 
stricture?  The  one  is  elastic  under  pressure  of 
necessity;  the  other  is  a  self-made  barrier  which  is 
as  insurmountable  as,  in  some  crisis,  it  might  be 
fatal. 

The  seventy-eighth  to  the  eighty-third  Federal 
ists,  dealing  with  the  federal  judiciary,  disclose  still 
another  side  to  this  man  of  marvelous  capacity. 
They  constitute  the  masterful  brief  of  a  superbly 
great  lawyer  who  has  few  peers  in  the  whole  story 
of  American  law.  With  convincing  force  he  argued 
the  justification  for  every  judicial  contemplation 
in  the  scheme  of  Government  which  the  Constitu 
tion  proposed.  "Courts,"  said  he,  finally,  "are 
to  be  considered  as  the  bulwark  of  a  limited  Con 
stitution  against  legislative  encroachment."  Also: 
"they  are  requisite  to  guard  the  Constitution  and 

170 


<§reate$t  American 

the  rights  of  individuals  from  the  effects  of  those 
ill  humors  which  the  arts  of  designing  men,  or  the 
influence  of  particular  conjunctures,  sometimes 
disseminate  among  the  people  themselves,  and 
which,  though  they  speedily  give  place  to  better 
information  and  more  deliberate  reflection,  have  a 
tendency,  in  the  meantime,  to  occasion  dangerous 
innovations  in  the  Government  and  serious  op 
pressions  on  the  minor  party,  in  the  community. " 

Here,  too,  Hamilton  laid  down  this  foundation 
principle — reflecting  not  only  his  own  passion  for 
law  and  order  but  also  his  country's  perpetual 
necessities  in  these  directions.  "People  have  the 
right  to  alter  or  abolish  the  established  Constitu 
tion,  whenever  they  find  it  inconsistent  with  their 
happiness;  but  until  the  people  have,  by  some 
solemn  and  authoritative  act,  annulled  or  changed 
the  established  form,  it  is  binding  upon  themselves, 
collectively,  as  well  as  individually;  and  no  pre 
sumption,  or  even  knowledge,  of  their  sentiments 
can  warrant  their  representatives  in  a  departure 
from  it,  prior  to  such  an  act." 

Unfriendly  historians  have  stressed  Hamilton's 
original  advocacy  of  a  life-tenure  for  Presidents 
and  Senators  as  confession  that  he  was  at  heart 
undemocratic.  They  have  made  the  error  of  con- 

171 


Greatest  American 

fusing  a  belief  in  strong,  continuing,  central  au 
thority,  with  a  disbelief  in  the  people  from  whose 
loins  the  strong,  central  authority  should  spring. 
Such  error  and  suspicion  must  be  dissipated  in  the 
face  of  two  sentences — a  veritable  Magna  Charta 
of  Democracy — which  proclaimed  the  essence  of 
The  Federalist,  as  follows: 

"The  fabric  of  American  empire  ought  to  rest  on 
the  solid  basis  of  the  consent  of  the  people.  The 
stream  of  national  power  ought  to  flow  immedi 
ately  from  that  pure,  original  fountain  of  all 
legitimate  authority." 


172 


Jf  ounber  of  tfje  ^u&ltc  Crebtt 


No  nation  ever  was  or  ever  will  be  stronger 
than  its  public  credit.  In  the  last  analysis  govern 
ment  always  was  and  always  will  be  a  matter  of 
business.  The  most  beautiful  idealisms  flounder 
until  properly  financed.  The  hidden  but  ever- 
lurking  reefs  of  fiscal  instability  have  wrecked  more 
human  experiments  than  any  other  single  element. 
Quicksand  undermines  any  human  institution 
that  is  economically  unsound.  The  great  Ameri 
can  adventure  was  no  exception  to  this  formula. 
Its  inspired  conception  and  its  exalted  creeds  were 
at  the  mercy  of  material  things.  Except  as  it  was 
saved  from  fiscal  chaos  which  threatened  upon  every 
hand,  except  as  it  was  organized  upon  healthy 
economic  law,  in  which  the  new  world  was  illy 
schooled,  it  would  have  suffered  still-born  fete, 
That  the  American  Ship  of  State  was  safely 
launched,  despite  these  snarling  knots  upon  the 
stays,  is  credit  —  and,  this  time,  unquestionably 
exclusive  credit  —  to  Alexander  Hamilton. 


(greatest  American 

Hamilton  first  disclosed  his  inborn  genius  for 
fiscal  foresight  while  he  was  yet  a  youthful  soldier 
on  General  Washington's  staff.  Despite  arduous 
and  exacting  military  and  secretarial  tasks  which 
burdened  him  far  beyond  the  physical  resistance 
normally  to  be  taxed  against  so  frail  a  physique  as 
was  his,  Hamilton's  mind  constantly  meditated 
upon  questions  of  government  and  finance  even 
in  these  earliest  days  before  independence  had  been 
safely  won.  Already  he  sensed  the  insecurity  of 
loose  federal  control.  With  depreciated  bills  in 
circulation  amounting  to  $160,000,000,  a  public 
debt  of  $40,000,000  and  an  unpaid  army  with  fast 
multiplying  arrears,  he  saw  the  approaching 
menace  of  a  pyramiding  crisis  in  the  shaky  Con 
federacy's  fiscal  affairs.  Let  it  be  remembered 
that  the  science  of  modern  political  economy  was 
as  yet  a  mystery  and  that  latter-day  refinements 
in  methods  of  expedited  finance  were  utterly  un 
known.  Adam  Smith's  Wealth  of  Nations  was 
but  four  years  old  and  had  not  reached  America. 

*% 

Precedents  were  meager  and  safe  authorities  scarce. 
Yet,  in  the  midst  of  military  distractions,  far  from 
books  or  records  or  counsel,  young  Hamilton,  just 
turned  twenty-three,  wrote  to  Robert  Morris  and 
out  of  a  luminous  intellect  constructively  discussed 

174 


American 

the  whole  structure  of  the  unsteady  Confederacy's 
financial  affairs.  He  analyzed  the  worthlessness 
of  existing  currency  and  the  causes  of  its  deprecia 
tion.  He  pointed  out  that  only  real  money,  and 
that  obtained  by  foreign  loans,  could  save  the 
desperate  situation;  and  then,  for  the  first  time,  he 
proposed  the  great  idea  which  was  to  become  the 
bone  and  sinew  of  his  subsequent  achievements. 
He  proposed  the  creation  of  The  National  Bank- 
to  be  called  The  Bank  of  the  United  States — which 
was  to  unify  the  moneyed  interests  of  the  country 
in  one  common  enterprise  for  the  advantage  of  the 
public  credit  and  the  facility  of  trade. 

This  oracular  program  was  at  once  so  novel  and 
so  ambitious  that  Hamilton,  after  reading  his  letter 
to  General  Washington,  sent  it  off  with  anonymous 
signature,  lest  the  unknown  credentials  of  its 
author  should  depreciate  the  profound  importance 
of  its  dialectics.  But  the  "James  Montague  of 
Morristown  "  who  thus  made  the  first  proposals  for 
a  federal  system  of  finance  which  was  soon  to  be 
come  the  material  bulwark  of  a  liberated  people 
was  not  of  a  disposition  to  avoid  responsibility  for 
the  evolution  of  his  dream.  When  Robert  Morris, 
the  unselfish  patriot  who  dedicated  his  whole  vast 
fortune  to  the  war-cause  of  the  Colonies  and  who 

i75 


(greatest  American 

was  then  struggling  vainly  with  the  strings  of  the 
Confederacy's  empty  purse,  replied  with  prompt 
sympathy  and  hearty  appreciation,  Hamilton  flung 
off  his  nom  de  plume.  He  wrote  to  James  Duane, 
then  a  member  of  Congress  from  New  York,  and 
to  Isaac  Sears,  another  sturdy  New  York  patriot, 
urging  the  vital  necessity  of  "a  government  with 
more  power,  a  tax  in  kind,  a  foreign  loan,  and  a 
bank  on  the  true  principles  of  a  bank/'  In  the 
spring  of  1781  he  submitted  a  second,  formal  memo 
randum  to  Morris,  reiterating  his  proposal  for  a 
National  Bank  and  amplifying  details  to  a  degree 
that  displayed  an  uncanny  prevision  and  distin 
guished  him  apart  as  combined  oracle  and  genius. 
"Power  without  revenue,  in  political  society,  is  a 
name,"  he  wrote  contemporaneously  in  The  Con- 
tinentalist.  He  was  years  ahead  of  his  time. 
Out  of  the  prodigality  of  his  ideas,  only  a  few  were 
then  adopted.  His  great,  central  undertakings 
had  to  await  a  maturer  day;  aye,  a  day  when  he 
himself  could  be  constructor  as  well  as  architect 
of  the  actual  institutions  of  the  new  republican 
experiment. 

As  Continental  Receiver  of  Taxes  for  New  York, 
a  critical  position  which  he  accepted  in  1782  at  the 
urgent  solicitation  of  Morris,  he  once  more  ex- 

176 


<§reate$t  American 


pounded  his  doctrines,  but  still  to  an  unready 
people.  Morris,  best  qualified  to  judge  the  relative 
capacities  of  the  men  of  that  moving  time,  wrote 
him  "your  perfect  knowledge  of  men  and  measures, 
and  the  abilities  with  which  Heaven  has  blessed 
you  will  give  you  a  fine  opportunity  to  forward 
the  public  service.  '  '  He  went  to  Poughkeepsie  and 
did  his  brilliant  best  to  induce  a  feeble  and  timid 
legislature  to  establish  scientific  taxation  upon  the 
ruins  of  existing  fiscal  confusion  worse  confounded. 
But  popular  vision  was  not  yet  blessed  with  his 
horizon.  The  most  of  tangible  advantage  that  he 
achieved  was  to  win  a  few  thousand  pounds  into  a 
yawning  treasury.  But,  intangibly  and  propheti 
cally,  he  was  strengthening  the  foundations  upon 
which  ultimately  he  was  to  erect  a  fiscal  structure 
that  was  destined  to  become  the  headstone  in  the 
corner.  <•, 

One  year  in  the  pallid  Continental  Congress, 
where  the  timidity  of  pseudo-central  power  and  the 
incohesion  of  its  member-states  defeated  his  ardent 
advocacy  of  a  federal  tax  on  imports,  only  served 
to  confirm  his  profound  convictions.  "No  one 
but  believes  you  a  man  of  honor  and  of  republican 
principles,'*  wrote  James  McHenry,  Lafayette's 
former  aide  and  a  member  of  this  Congress.  '  '  Were 

177 


American 

you  ten  years  older  and  20,000  pounds  richer,  there 
is  no  doubt  but  that  you  might  obtain  the  suffrages 
of  Congress  for  the  highest  office  in  their  gift/* 

In  the  period  which  had  to  intervene  ere  Hamil 
ton's  larger  vision  brought  its  economic  blessings  to 
his  whole  country,  he  applied  his  genius  and 
pioneer  ideas  to  assisting  in  the  foundation  of  the 
Bank  of  New  York — a  working  model,  in  a  modest 
way,  of  the  greater  structure  he  was  yet  to  build. 
Meanwhile,  too,  sitting  in  the  New  York  legisla 
ture,  he  once  more  waged  a  mighty  contest  to  secure 
a  state  grant  of  permanent  revenue  to  Congress, 
but  failed.  He  realized  now  that  no  expedient 
could  serve.  There  must  be  a  new  government  or 
there  soon  would  be  no  government  at  all. 

Then  history  wrote  with  rushing  pen.  General 
Washington,  the  placid,  magnanimous,  trusted  idol 
of  his  time  became  first  President  of  the  United 
States  and  designated  Hamilton  as  first  Secretary 
to  preside  over  the  uncertain  destinies  of  the  new 
Department  of  the  Treasury.  Hamilton  promptly 
closed  his  law  offices  in  New  York,  traded  his  re 
munerative  private  income  for  a  comparatively 
paltry  federal  stipend,  gave  up  the  peace  and  the 
easy  accomplishment  which  was  his  professional 
lot  as  a  leader  at  the  bar,  and  without  a  moment's 

178 


(greatest  American 


hesitation  answered  his  beloved  chieftain's  draft 
which  ordered  him  to  the  most  delicate,  the  most 
desperate,  the  most  important  responsibility  con 
fronting  The  Great  Experiment.  He  became  at 
once  the  boldest  and  the  most  constructive  Min 
ister  who  ever  held  an  American  portfolio  or 
dominated  an  administration. 

Ten  days  after  Hamilton's  appointment,  Con 
gress  directed  him  to  prepare  a  report  upon  the 
public  credit.  It  turned  to  him  instinctively  as 
to  a  saviour,  confident  of  his  abilities  to  chart  re 
lease  from  the  chaos  which  loomed  on  every  side. 
Promptly  he  responded  with  the  recommendation 
of  temporary  measures  that  should  suffice  until 
the  permanent  foundations  might  be  put  down. 
Immediate  funds  were  necessary  for  the  pressing 
wants  of  the  new  government  before  any  considera 
tion  could  be  given  to  this  permanent  system  that 
should  bring  permanent  relief  to  the  nation's  empty 
coffers  and  tragically  broken  credit.  With  infinite 
sagacity  and  resourcefulness  he  bridged  this  gap, 
ofttimes  by  pledging  his  own  personal  credit  as 
Robert  Morris  had  done  before  him.  IJeJaid  out  a 
complete  system  of  federal  accounting  which  sur-  ... 
vivesr  in  principle,  to  this  modern  day.  Amid  it 
all,  he  wrote  his  formal  answer  to  the  original  con- 

179 


<@reate£t  American 

^V  gressional  request;  and,  following  the  January  re 
cess,  he  presented  his  first  great  Report  upon  the 
Public  Credit — the  Magna  Charta  of  American 
governmental  finance.  It  was  as  comprehensive 
in  scope  as  it  was  minute  in  detail.  It  was  a 
perfectly  squared  corner  stone  ready  to  be  placed 
in  the  permanent  foundations  of  the  governmental 
structure  which  was  destined  to  bear  the  weight  of 
centuries.  It  was  the  climax  to  a  lifetime  of 
preparation  for  a  crisis. 

In  this  and  in  subsequent  reports  which  followed 
in  swift  succession,  Hamilton  established  the  fiscal 
system  and  policies  and  machinery  of  the  United 
States,  not  alone  for  his  own  time,  but  in  large 
measure  for  posterity.  He  first  demonstrated  the 
necessity  for  a  bulwarked  public  credit,  not  alone 
as  a  source  of  revenue,  but  equally  as  a  source  of 
national  greatness,  honor,  defense  against  aggres 
sion,  and  security  for  public  order.  Then  he  pro 
ceeded  with  his  astute  ways  and  means.  He 
proposed  to  consolidate  and  fund  all  the  debts  of 
the  United  States  incurred  in  war  or  derivative 
therefrom.  To  relieve  immediate  pressure  he  pro 
posed  to  turn  a  portion  of  this  debt  into  long-time 
bonds;  but  for  no  debt  did  he  propose  to  concede 
repudiation.  He  divided  the  debt  into  three  parts; 

1 80 


. 


(greatest  American 

the  foreign  debt  and  the  domestic  debt  totaling 
$54,000,000  and  the  debts  of  the  States  amounting 
to  $25,000,000.  These  are  small  figures  in  this 
modern  day  of  billion-dollar  saturnalias.  But 
they  were  gigantic  and  appalling  in  1790.  To 
enhance  the  revenues  necessary  to  finance  his  pro 
gram,  he  proposed  an  increased  excise  on  imports, 
it  always  being  his  theory  to  avoid  direct  taxation 
as  far  as  possible  and  to  put  the  major  burden  of  all 
tax  quests  upon  luxuries  or  non-essentials.  Having 
carried  this  theory  to  its  practical  limit,  he  pro 
posed  an  internal  revenue  assessed  against  the 
domestic  manufacture  of  spirits.  This  latter  thing 
was  a  direct  test  of  the  strength  of  the  new  central 
sovereignty  because  it  invaded  a  field  in  which  the 
States  heretofore  had  enjoyed  a  jealous  and  ex 
clusive  jurisdiction.  But  he  faced  his  problem 
only  with  the  more  unflinching  determination 
because  it  involved  a  powerful  determination  of 
political  as  well  as  economic  concerns.  Always^ 
he  thrived  on  opposition.  fThen  he  proposed  to 
found  his  long  meditated  National  Bank;  first,  as 
avresuscitation  to  the  public  credit ;  second,  to  pro 
vide  capital  and  a  circulating  medium  vital  to  the 
conduct  of  domestic  trade  and  foreign  commerce; 
third,  to  restore  general  public  confidence;  fourth, 

181 


(greatest  American 

to  facilitate  the  day-to-day  ttrnsactions  of  business, 
through  the  issuance  of  such  bank  notes  as  are  now 
a  routine  essential  in  our  business  lives;  fifth,  to 
erect  one  more,  central  citadel  of  Union  strength 
and  power  and  federalized  authority.  He  pro 
posed  a  mint  and  the  coinage  of  money  on  a  dollar, 
decimal  base./  He  outlined  the  complete  philoso 
phy  of  the  modernly  known  "protective  tariff." 
In  a  word,  he  prepared  the  encyclopedic  charts 
which,  with  such  changes  as  have  been  necessitated 
by  circumstance  and  national  development,  re 
main  today  as  the  basic  financial  doctrines  of  the 
Government  of  the  United  States. 

It  was  one  thing  to  propose;  another  to  obtain. 
But  Hamilton  never  shunned  a  battle ;  and  into  this 
one  he  once  more  rode  with  all  the  indomitable 
spirit  at  his  command.  The  immediate  conse 
quence  of  the  publication  of  his  reports  was  a  fifty 
per  cent  rise  in  the  value  of  the  securities  of  the 
bankrupt  Confederation,  a  flurry  of  inordinate 
speculation  which  grasped  for  easy  profits  out  of 
these  unexpected  prospects  of  redemption,  and  a 
corresponding  stride  in  the  congressional  bitter 
ness  with  which  his  proposals  were  attacked.  It 
was  a  habit  of  that  expedient  day  to  repudiate 
whatever  it  was  inconvenient  to  redeem.  No  one 

182 


American 

openly  objected  to  squaring  foreign  accounts. 
But  the  domestic  debt  was  a  different  proposition. 
Hamilton's  opposition  disguised  its  real  penury  in 
a  sanctimonious  protest  against  the  speculators 
who  had  bought  up  the  old  certificates  at  their 
depreciated  values  and  who  were  in  the  way  of 
large,  unearned  and  undeserved  dividends  if  the 
government  now  validated  this  debt  at  par.  The 
11  original  holder"  became  a  sudden  source  of  ex 
treme  political  solicitation,  though  this  "  original 
holder"  was  usually  one  of  those  rugged,  ragged 
Continental  soldiers  for  whom  Hamilton  had  un- 
availingly  besought  proper  compensation  in  other 
days  from  many  of  these  same  shifty  statesmen 
who  now  joined  the  hue  and  cry  against  him 
and  his  prodigious  undertakings.  Even  Madison 
joined  the  opposition,  the  beginning  of  his  break 
with  the  Federalists,  and  proposed  a  discrimina 
tory  settlement.  But  to  all  evasion  or  compromise 
Hamilton  and  his  party — the  Federalists  were  now 
a  party  in  the  true  sense  of  modern  usage — turned 
deaf  ears.  To  restore  the  credit,  the  honor  and  the 
good  name  of  the  United  States  could  permit  of 
no  pawnbrokering  in  government  securities  by 
the  government  itself,  no  matter  in  whose  hands 
these  securities  might  have  finally  lodged.  A 

183 


(greatest  American 


promise  to  pay  was  sacred  and  its  repudiation 
could  be  excused  by  no  expedient  reasoning  if  the 
pledged  word  of  the  debtor-nation  was  to  stand 
clean  before  the  world.  These  were  the  cardinal 
tenets  of  Hamilton's  demands  in  relation  to  the 
Confederacy's  foreign  and  domestic  debt.  We 
were  the  legatees  of  the  Revolution's  benefits;  we 
must  be  the  legatees  of  its  griefs  and  burdens. 
That  strong  men  rallied  vigorously  to  his  support 
made  victory  for  his  contentions  possible.  But 
without  Hamilton,  neither  rally  nor  victory  could 
have  obtained.  Once  more  a  people's  destiny 
hung  upon  him  and  his  powers. 

At  the  end  of  long  and  acrimonious  debate  the 
Federalists  won  their  point.  This  left  the  assump 
tion  of  the  debts  of  the  States  to  be  determined; 
and  the  battle  that  ensued  aligned  men  and  parties 
in  the  bitterest  of  feuds.  Against  assumption  it 
was  argued  :  first,  that  too  great  a  yoke  would  be 
laid  upon  a  struggling  land;  second,  that  such  a 
burden  was  an  injustice  to  the  United  States; 
third,  that  such  a  policy  was  inequitable  in  its 
favors  to  heavily  mortgaged  States  and  in  its  rela 
tive  indifference  to  the  rights  of  States  that  had 
been  more  provident  or  more  fortunate;  fourth, 
that  by  unifying  the  nation's  war  obligations,  it 

184 


(greatest  American 

unified  the  nation  itself  in  greater  degree  than  a 
proper  conception  of  States  Rights  could  concede. 
Feeling  was  intense  and  arguments  were  vicious. 
The  Anti-Federalists  at  last  found  themselves  with 
a  concrete  issue  around  which  to  rally  an  opposi 
tion  that  always  had  been  at  war  with  Hamilton 
and  with  effective  Union,  but  which  had  lacked 
cohesion  and  morale.  Also  they  soon  found  them 
selves  with  a  distinguished  leader — for  Thomas 
Jefferson  had  just  arrived  from  France  and  become 
Washington's  Secretary  of  State. 

But  Hamilton  was  no  stranger  to  contest  against 
overwhelming  prejudice  and  heavy,  hostile  odds. 
If  he  could  win  New  York  to  the  Constitution  as 
by  miracle,  he  could  win  Congress  to  assumption. 
Loyally  assisted  by  strong  lieutenants  on  the  floor 
of  Congress,  he  gave  uncompromising  battle,  and 
shortly  won  an  initial  victory  in  committee  of 
the  whole  by  desperately  narrow  margin.  The 
staggered,  but  determined,  opposition  jockeyed 
for  delays  until  the  State  delegation  from  North 
Carolina,  at  last  in  the  Union,  arrived  and  furnish 
ed  a  thin  majority  of  two  against  assumption.  In 
this  dead-locked  impasse  the  factions  faced  and 
fought  each  other  for  many  perilous  days  during 
which  threats  of  dissolution  were  common  cur- 

185 


(greatest  American 


rency  and  the  fate  of  America  trembled  in  the 
balance.  A  less  resolute  and  resourceful  leader 
would  have  collapsed  in  the  presence  of  such  a 
barrier.  Hamilton  was  not  himself  a  member  of 
the  Congress  and  the  forensic  weapons  which  had 
won  his  victory  at  Poughkeepsie  in  the  New  York 
Constitutional  Convention  were  foreclosed  to  his 
present  use.  But  his  was  not  a  one-track  mind. 
It  was  true  of  him  as  Goldsmith  said  of  Johnson: 
"There's  no  arguing  with  him;  if  his  pistol  misses 
fire,  he  knocks  you  down  with  the  butt  end  -of 
it."  He  found  the  vulnerable  spot  in  the  armor 
of  the  Anti-Federalists  and  quietly  proceeded 
to  achieve  by  state-craft  what  his  lieutenants 
could  not  gain  by  force.  Because  he  deemed 
every  element  of  his  financial  program  vital  to  his 
country,  he  would  not  compromise  upon  it  in  one 
single  phase.  But  because  it  was  inconsequential 
to  the  fundaments  of  government  where  the 
permanent  Capitol  should  be  located,  he  pro 
ceeded  to  trade  votes  in  the  minor  matter  in  order 
to  achieve  the  major  need. 

This  question  of  a  permanent  site  for  the  federal 
city  had  been  second  only  to  assumption  in  its 
power  to  incite  acid  controversy.  Whether  this 
crown  jewel  should  fall  to  the  North  or  to  the  South 

1  86 


(greatest  American 

was  a  contention  rich  in  state  prides  and  factions 
and  sectional  jealousies.  To  Hamilton,  who  now 
as  always  gloried  in  a  continental  mind,  this  rivalry 
was  of  but  petty  moment.  But  he  seized  it  as  the 
agency  for  compromise.  Most  of  the  votes  favor 
ing  assumption  were  North;  most  votes  opposing 
assumption  were  South.  Jefferson  was  still  too 
fresh  from  France  to  have  acquired  the  hatred  of 
Hamilton  which  ultimately  came  to  fill  his  soul, 
yet  his  long  absence  from  America  had  not  dulled 
him  to  a  share  in  his  Virginia's  ambitions  to  lure 
the  Capitol  city  South.  In  a  quiet  conference  be 
tween  these  two  members  of  President  Washing 
ton's  first  official  family,  Hamilton  agreed  to  secure 
votes  for  a  southern  Capitol  and  Jefferson  agreed 
to  secure  votes  for  assumption.  In  after  years 
Jefferson  sought  to  pretend  that  he  was  duped  in 
this  transaction.  But  his  pretensions  were  ridicu 
lous.  He  may  have  been  out-generaled  by  a  su 
perior  genius.  He  may  have  been  victimized  by 
his  own  lack  of  foresight  in  failing  to  realize  that  he 
was  helping  to  forge  one  more  link  into  the  chain  of 
federalized  control  which  he  later  sought  to  break. 
But  he  was  not  " duped."  Hamilton  was  not 
that  fashion  of  a  man.  Nor,  indeed,  was  Jeffer 
son.  In  any  event,  for  Jefferson  to  deprecate  this 

187 


(Greatest  American 

historic  bargain — a  bargain  which  alone  made 
assumption  possible — leaves  Alexander  Hamilton 
with  sole  and  exclusive  credit  for  one  more  achieve 
ment  which  saved  the  United  States  in  an  hour  of 
peril  that  could  easily  have  hastened  the  Civil 
War  by  seventy  years.  To  complain  of  the  bar 
gain  is  to  complain  of  its  fruits.  To  repudiate  its 
wisdom  is  to  repudiate  its  net  results.  The  results 
were  the  preservation  and  perpetuation  of  an 
honorable  public  integrity  in  the  foundation  of  the 
public  credit,  and  the  establishment  of  the  Capitol 
City  of  Washington.  These,  then,  become  two 
more  monuments  to  Alexander  Hamilton. 

After  assumption  had  been  voted  and  the  Capitol 
City  located  on  the  Potomac,  Hamilton's  proposals 
for  the  revenue,  the  excise  and  the  mint  were  voted 
substantially  as  recommended.  The  National 
Bank  alone  remained  for  action.  Once  more  the 
stubborn  prejudice  against  strong  federal  control 
precipitated  bitter  strife.  The  opposition  con 
jured  every  possible  bogie  and  played  on  every 
possible  chord  of  class  and  sectional  faction.  But 
the  impetus  of  Hamilton's  policies  was  not  to  be 
denied.  The  bill  passed  Congress  by  a  snug  ma 
jority.  Anti-Federalists  made  their  last  stand  in 
the  Cabinet.  Madison,  Jefferson  and  Randolph 

1 88 


(greatest  American 


filed  written  arguments  with  Washington  to  show 
the  proposal  unconstitutional.  Washington  him 
self  was  in  doubt.  His  own  Premier  and  his  own 
Attorney-General  were  vehement  in  their  hostile 
recommendations.  Washington  went  so  far  as 
to  ask  Madison  for  a  form  of  veto.  But,  amid  a 
multitude  of  other  pressing  obligations,  Hamilton 
drafted  his  famous  defense,  invoking  the  implied 
powers  of  the  Constitution,  which  not  only  won 
Washington  and  saved  the  Bank,  but  also  set  a  legal 
precedent  which  will  live  as  long  as  the  Republic 
stands.  The  juridical  phases  of  this  latter  import 
ant  circumstance  deserve  an  emphasis  at  greater 
length  which  is  undertaken  in  a  subsequent  chapter. 
The  seal  of  Washington's  deliberate  approval 
upon  this  entire  fiscal  program  which  Hamilton 
builded  was  not  the  least  of  its  credentials.  The 
fact  that  Washington,  overruling  other  intimate 
advisers,  thus  joined  with  Hamilton,  time  and 
again,  in  these  parading  crises  demonstrated  —  as 
have  subsequent  events  —  that  the  minds  of  these 
two  mighty  men  were  soundly  in  solemn  concert  in 
all  these  critical  affairs  upon  which  hung  the 
destiny  of  modern  institutions.  It  was  their 
partnership  which  set  up  the  House  of  Govern 
ment  and  put  it  in  running  order. 

189 


(greatest  American 

The  Anti-Federalists,  consolidated  by  Jefferson 
and  Madison,  left  no  malignant  resort  unattempted 
to  break  down  this  partnership  and  to  ruin  Hamil 
ton.  They  failed  in  the  former  when  Washington 
whole-heartedly  ruled  with  his  Treasurer  when 
Hamilton  made  his  famous  written  reply  to  the 
fulminating  accusations  filed  against  him  with  the 
President  by  his  routed  adversaries;  they  failed  in 
the  latter  when  Congress  overwhelmingly  defeated 
nine  resolutions  of  censure  aimed  at  Hamilton's 
honor  and  integrity.  This  latter  unfragrant  epi 
sode  opened  with  an  abusive  and  declamatory 
demand  in  Congress  for  an  accounting  on  foreign 
loans  and  a  general  ventilation  of  insinuated 
frauds.  It  hastened  to  climax  through  a  rapid 
fire  of  responsive  reports  from  the  indicted  Minis 
ter  so  accurate,  so  comprehensive,  and  so  lucid  that 
Hamilton's  probity  and  intellect  shone  forth  like 
brilliant  stars.  It  closed  with  a  tragically  lone 
some  minority,  uncomfortable  Madison  among  the 
number,  voting  for  resolutions  of  censure  which 
the  Federalists  forced  to  a  decisive  vote,  refusing 
to  allow  that  they  should  be  snuffed  quietly  and 
softly  into  oblivion.  Maranatha  never  plotted 
more  devilishly  against  an  honest  man  nor  failed 
more  completely  to  spot  its  mark.  "It  has  since 

190 


(greatest  American 

been  admitted  by  all  persons — even  those  most 
opposed  to  Hamilton,  the  statesman,  and  most 
inimical  to  Hamilton,  the  man — that  in  all  matters 
of  money  and  business  he  uniformly  displayed  an 
integrity  altogether  irreproachable,  a  sense  of 
honor  delicate  to  the  last  degree,"  says  John  T. 
Morse,  Jr.,  in  his  Life  of  Hamilton.  "Against  all 
insinuations  of  wrongdoing  in  the  conduct  of  the 
affairs  of  his  department  he  has  long  since  been 
acknowledged  to  be  impregnable." 

Hamilton's  contributions  to  the  fiscal  piers  of 
the  Republic  were  now  drawing  to  a  close.  One 
stirring  chapter  alone  -remained  to  be  written. 
The  passage  of  the  1791  excise  law  brought  prompt 
rebellion  in  Western  Pennsylvania,  where  the 
manufacture  of  whiskey  was  chiefly  concentrated, 
and  in  certain  sections  of  Virginia  and  North 
Carolina.  While  Hamilton,  in  the  discharge  of 
his  official  duties,  made  every  effort  to  render  the 
law  as  unobnoxious  as  possible,  he  was  firm  as 
granite  in  his  determination  to  enforce  the  tax; 
first,  because  he  would  have  surrendered  his  life 
rather  than  consent  that  his  theory  of  Government 
was  powerless -to -defend  the  central  sovereignty 
against  any  insubordinate  sector;  second,  because 
he  conceived  it  vital  that  the  federal  authority 

191 


(Greatest  American 

to  spread  this  tax  be  vindicated  and  the  avails 
secured  to  a  famished  Treasury.  A  History  of  the 
Insurrection  in  the  Four  Western  Counties  of  Penn 
sylvania  in  1794,  written  by  William  Findley  in 
1796,  advances  the  curious  theory  that  Hamilton's 
"delay"  or  "negligence"  in  enforcing  the  excise 
law  was  a  deliberately  intended  effort  to  foster  dis 
orders  "until  they  would  produce  a  more  serious 
issue."  "Many  men  knew,"  wrote  Findley,  "that 
he  who  stood  at  the  helm  of  the  revenue  depart 
ment  had  no  aversion  to  being  employed  as  a  pilot 
in  the  storm."  This  exhibit  is  interesting  chiefly 
as  it  testifies  to  the  extent  of  ramifying  suspicions 
which  Hamilton  had  to  confront  in  effecting  uni 
versal  submission  to  the  new  government  and  its 
authority.  Findley,  of  course,  was  entirely  within 
the  facts  when  he  testified  that  Hamilton  "had  no 
aversion  to  being  employed  as  a  pilot  in  the  storm." 
There  never  was  a  storm  before  which  he  ever 
flinched,  nor  in  which  he  was  not  ready,  on  the 
instant,  to  grasp  the  wheel  and  steer  the  course. 
There  never  was  a  responsibility  which  he  shirked 
nor  a  crisis  for  which  he  was  unprepared.  But  that 
he  invited  the  "Whiskey  Rebellion"  for  the  sake 
of  the  sheer  joy  of  putting  it  down  is  one  more 
absurd  libel,  born  of  the  partisan  vituperation 

192 


(greatest  American 


of  the  time,  and  suggestive  principally  of  Ham 
ilton's  dominion  over  the  harrowed  and  jealous 
imagination  of  his  foes. 

In  the  summer  of  1792  Hamilton  drafted  a  stern 
proclamation  addressed  to  these  petty  rebels, 
which  Jefferson  protestingly  countersigned  and 
Washington  willingly  promulgated.  This  warn 
ing,  plus  Washington's  tremendous  personal  in 
fluence  in  the  South,  quelled  the  restless  forces 
of  anarchy  in  Carolina  and  Virginia.  But  the 
Western  Pennsylvanians  graduated  from  insolence 
and  outrage  into  open,  armed  defiance  of  the 
Government  and  its  agencies.  Another  hour  of 
decisive  test  had  come  and  it  found  Hamilton,  as 
always,  not  only  ready  with  every  detail  to  meet 
the  emergency  with  swift  zeal,  but  also  eager  to 
lead  the  military  forces  which  Washington  called 
to  arms  to  crush  this  "Whiskey  Rebellion's  "  chal 
lenge  to  the  authority  .of  the  Republic.  Washing 
ton,  with  Hamilton  at  his  side,  met  this  as  he  met 
every  other  crisis.  An  army  of  1  5,000  men  marched 
into  the  treason  zone.  Hamilton  assumed  its 
general  superintendence.  One  parley,  sought  by 
the  insurgents  and  readily  granted,  failed.  The 
army  deployed  for  action.  The  mere  display 

of    firm    intent    sufficed.     The    rebellion    faded 

i93 


(greatest  American 

into  universal  surrender  which  Hamiltoi}  accepted 
with  un vengeful  toleration  and  forbearance.  He 
sought  to  avoid  unnecessary  scars;  but  lie  sought 
first  to  establish  for  all  time  the  power  of  the 
federal  Government  to  levy  and  collect  an  excise 
tax  and  to  rule  its  subordinate  units  under  the 
Constitution.  Before,  during  and  after  the 
" Whiskey  Rebellion"  his  policy  was  the  first 
model,  in  a  relatively  small  but  at  the  time  dread 
fully  critical  way,  of  the  policy  which  inspired 
Lincoln  before,  during  and  after  a  later  Rebellion 
which  closed  the  final  chapter  in  the  record 
of  questioned  Union  and  its  powers  of  self- 
preservation. 


Any  consideration  of  Hamilton's  relationships 
to  America's  sound  economic  foundations  and  his 
contributions  to  the  public  credit  would  be  incom 
plete  without  an  epitomizing  survey  of  his  influ 
ence  upon  the  government's  relations  with  de 
veloped  commerce  and  industry.  We  turn  back, 
therefore,  in  the  climax  of  this  particular  chapter 
to  exhibits  upon  this  important  score.  Hamilton 
was  America's  first  great  economist  and  the  cen 
tury  that  has  since  intervened,  despite  its  profound 
development  of  a  science  which  was  an  uncertain 

194 


>c 


(greatest  American 

exploration  in  Hamilton's  day,  has  not  produced 
his  peer.  The  heirs  to  his  economic  wisdom  have 
borrowed  his  mold  and  given  it  expansion  and  im 
provement.  But  they  are  still  tramping  down  the 
trails  he  blazed.  He  set  guide-posts  on  our  eco 
nomic  highways  that  still  point  the  route  to  sound 
public  policy  in  the  contacts  between  government 
and  commerce. 

At  the  close  of  1791,  in  the  culmination  of  a 
series  of  diversified  state  papers  which  sounded 
the  depths  of  every  important  problem  confronting 
embryo  America,  Hamilton  sent  his  "Report  on 
Manufactures"  to  the  first  American  Congress. 
It  was  presented  as  the  cap-sheaf  in  the  financial 
policies  which  the  first  Secretary  of  the  Treasury 
gave  to  his  hard-pressed  contemporaries  and  be 
queathed  to  posterity.  But  its  importance  tran 
scended  application  limited  to  any  single  field.  It 
was  addressed  to  the  development  of  the  resources 
of  the  new  country,  to  the  end  that  the  United 
States  should  be  rendered  as  strong  and  as  inde 
pendent  in  material  as  in  political  concerns.  It 
reflected  the  practical  vision  of  a  statesman  who 
realized  that  prosperity  and  perpetuity  were 
synonyms  in  the  lexicon  of  experimental  republican 
institutions. 

i95 


(greatest  American 

Incidental  to  his  program — yet  prophetic  of  the 
great  evolution  since  seen — Hamilton  enunciated  for 
the  first  time  the  doctrine  of  internal  improvements 
at  public  expense.  He  particularly  emphasized 
the  propriety  of  federal  encouragement  in  the  con 
struction  of  roads  and  bridges.  He  also  proposed 
a  system  for  encouraging  creative  genius  through 
the  protection  of  patents.  There  was  no  useful 
detail  which  this  master  builder  forgot  or  ignored. 
All  were  essential  cogs  in  the  great  economic  ma 
chine.  But  the  paramount  purpose  behind  his 
elaborate,  painstaking  "Report  on  Manufactures" 
was  to  emphasize  the  importance  of  industry  in  the 
evolution  of  successful  and  stabilized  government, 
and  to  challenge  attention  to  the  need,  as  a  govern 
ment  policy,  of  giving  it  encouragement.  In  this 
fashion  was  the  whole ' '  protectionist  policy ' '  in  Am 
erica  born  and  under  these  auspices.  It  is  rarely 
given  to  one  man  to  propose  some  powerful  phi 
losophy  which  lives  down  the  ages  with  its  influence 
upon  the  affairs  of  peoples. _j  Yet  Hamilton  was 
the  author  of  two:  first,  his  proposition  that  the 
Constitution  is  clothed  with  "implied  powers" 
essential  unto  its  functions;  second,  that  a  protec 
tive  tariff  is  necessary  to  make  a  nation  economi 
cally  independent .  This  latter  doctrine  has  been  the 

196 


(greatest  American 

dominating  issue  in  countless  subsequent  political 
campaigns — more  emphatically  featured  long  years 
after  Hamilton's  death  than  it  was  in  his  living 
time.  Until  the  Great  War  upset  all  normal  cal 
culations,  both  as  to  revenue  and  industry,  the 
protective  tariff  has  been  the  traditional  dividing 
philosophy  to  distinguish  between  Republicanism 
and  Democracy  for  the  last  half  century.  In  its 
repeated  application  to  American  conditions,  it 
has  vindicated  every  hope  that  Hamilton  proposed 
for  it.  To  have  been  its  American  founder  be 
speaks  credentials  which  even  the  modern  disbe 
liever  in  "protection"  will  concede  to  measure  a 
mighty  mentality  with  a  powerful  grasp  upon  the 
nation's  economic  future  which  was  illy  evident  in 
the  disorganization  and  commercial  chaos  in  the 
midst  of  which  he  wrote.  Indeed,  he  wrote  for  the 
future.  In  most  respects  his  "Report  on  Manu 
factures"  was  more  a  legacy  than  an  immediate 
advantage. 

1  In  exhaustive  detail  which  examined  every 
article  of  industry  in  all  its  relations,  Hamilton 
expounded  his  proposition  that  the  establishment 
of  American  manufactures  must  be  encouraged. 
Two  fundamental  aims  impelled  his  vision;  mili 
tary  security  and  national  development.  "Every 

197 


<Efje  <6reatetft  American 

nation,  with  a  view  to  those  great  objects,  ought 
to  endeavor  to  possess  within  itself  all  the  essen 
tials  of  national  supply/'  he  wrote.  "These  com 
prise  the  means  of  subsistence,  habitation,  clothing 
and  defense.  The  possession  of  these  is  necessary 
to  the  perfection  of  the  body  politic ;  to  the  safety 
as  well  as  to  the  welfare  of  society."  From  this 
premise  he  argued  the  essentiality  of  manufactures 
as  well  as  agriculture  and  again  demonstrated,  as 
he  had  done  in  The  Continentalist  nine  years 
before,  the  interdependence  and  the  mutual  recip 
rocal  interest  of  both.  Upon  that  other  occasion 
he  had  tritely  said:  "Oppress  trade,  lands  sink  in 
value;  make  it  flourish,  their  value  rises.  En 
cumber  husbandry,  trade  declines;  encourage 
agriculture,  commerce  revives." 

He  refused  to  accept  the  easy  alternative  of 
leaving  industry  to  find  for  itself  the  most  useful 
and  profitable  employment.  He  was  unwilling  to 
await  natural  consequences,  good  or  ill,  if  bene 
ficent  consequences  could  be  guaranteed  by  gov 
ernment  action.  He  refused  to  concede  that  it 
was  best  for  a  thinly  settled  agricultural  nation, 
like  the  new  America,  to  buy  its  manufactured 
articles  in  foreign  markets  wherever  cheapest  price 
might  seem  superficially  to  beckon  to  greatest  bar- 

198 


(greatest  American 

gain;  He  was  unwilling  to  leave  the  United  States 
at  the  mercy  of  "  combinations,  right  or  wrong,  of 
foreign  policy."  He  refused  to  transfer  responsi 
bility  for  the  whole  good  of  the  whole  people  to  the 
initiative  and  commercial  courage  of  individual 
pioneers  in  manufacture.  He  knew  and  did  not 
hesitate  to  say  that  such  dubious  reliance  left  the 
country  chained  to  "the  fear  of  want  of  success  in 
untried  enterprises,  the  intrinsic  difficulties  of  first 
essays,  and  the  bounties,  premiums  and  other  arti 
ficial  encouragements  with  which  foreign  nations 
second  the  exertions  of  their  own  citizens."  He 
refused  to  listen  to  the  pretense  that  " protection" 
tends  to  create  monopolies,  erect  class  benefit  at 
community  expense,  or  sectional  benefit  at  the  ex 
pense  of  other  sections.  He  was  impatient  with  any 
argument  which  did  not  acknowledge  the  horizon 
of  all  America;  and  the  painstaking  demonstrated 
that  a  benefit  to  one  is  a  benefit  to  all  in  the  final 
dissemination  of  its  fruits^JJ 

These  sentences  read  less  like  ancient  history 
than  like  a  page  from  contemporary  political  de 
bates.  Nothing  could  testify  more  strikingly  that 
Hamilton  was  the  farthest  seeing  man  of  his  age. 
Back  in  1791  he  was  planning  the  encouragement 
of  infant  industry  by  a  combination  of  bounties 

199 


(greatest  American 

and  protective  duties,  the  surplus  revenues  of  the 
latter  to  supply  the  funds  for  the  former.  He  was 
the  first  American  "Protectionist."  His  whole 
theory  of  "protection,"  however,  was  for  the  crea 
tion  of  whatever  differential  might  be  necessary 
to  defend  new  industry  on  this  side  of  the  world 
from  devastating  competition  at  the  hands  of  old, 
established  industry  on  the  other  side  of  the  world. 
In  other  words  his  idea  of  "protection"  compre 
hended  nothing  beyond  this  differential.  Hence, 
he  was  the  first  author  of  the  best  modernly  ac 
cepted  rule  as  to  what  a  correct  protective  tariff 
should  do;  namely,  to  measure  the  difference  in 
cost  of  production  at  home  and  abroad.  His 
theory  of  "protection"  was  not  a  benefit  to  manu 
facturers  alone,  but  a  benefit  to  the  country 
through  manufactures.*  A  more  pertinent  distinc 
tion  could  not  be  made ;  and  Hamilton  made  it,  by 
±he  nature  of  his  argument,  130  years  ago.  His 
whole  "Report  on  Manufactures"  remains  to  this 
"(lay  the  most  lucid  and  convincing  and  complete 
defense  of  a  protective  tariff  system  which  has  ever 
been  given  to  the  American  people,  not  excepting 
any  of  the  brilliant  exponents  who  have  since 
stormed  America's  economic  conscience  with  am 
plified  Hamiltonian  ideas.  J 

20(/ 


(greatest  American 

Mr.  Herbert  Hoover,  Secretary  of  Commerce  in 
President  Harding's  Cabinet,  offered  some  con 
temporary  observations  in  a  banquet  address 
(New  York,  May  23,  1921),  which  throw  a  further 
illumination  upon  Hamilton's  foresight  in  mingling 
matters  of  commerce  and  government.  In  the 
course  of  a  speech  which  recalled  the  days  of  the 
Republic's  foundation,  Mr.  Hoover  said: 

"  Alexander  Hamilton  was  then  Secretary  of  the. 
Treasury,  laying  down  those  foundations  of  the  eco 
nomic  life  of  America  which  still  endure,  to  which 
we  still  adhere,  or  should  adhere.  Hamilton  was 
the  one  man  in  the  government  of  that  day  who 
visualized  the  importance  of  commerce,  the  im 
portance  of  the  service  Government  could  do  for 
commerce.  He  had  proposed  that  the  Cabinet 
should  be  composed  of  five  members — Foreign 
Affairs,  War,  Treasury,  Interior  and  Trade.  And 
despite  the  cogent  reasons  that  Hamilton  enun 
ciated  for  the  creation  of  the  last-named  depart 
ment,  it  was  nearly  100  years  before  the  commercial 
men  of  the  United  States  realized  that  necessity 
into  actual  legislation."  (Reported  in  the  New 
York  Herald,  May  24,  1921.) 

In  other  words,  Hamilton's  functions  not  only 
served  practically  every  department  of  Govern- 

201 


(greatest  American 


ment  that  was  founded  in  his  time  but  also  leaped 
a  century  and  anticipated  the  foundation  of  other 
works  that  were  to  come. 

Hamilton  completed  his  great  fiscal  cycle  by 
pushing  through  Congress  a  comprehensive  plan 
for  the  ultimate  redemption  of  the  entire  public 
debt.  Thus,  triumphantly,  he  finished  his  tre 
mendous  undertakings  in  behalf  of  soundly  founded 
federal  finance.  With  the  luminous  fixity  of  the 
north  star  he  had  held  steadfastly  to  his  course 
through  more  than  a  decade  of  barriers,  discourage 
ments,  opposition  and  abuse.  With  dauntless  per 
severance  and  unquenchable  courage  —  both  vital 
to  a  people  whom  he  served  better  than  they  knew 
—  he  had  broken  down  every  obstacle  in  the  paths 
of  fiscal  evolution.  For  nearly  six  years  he  had 
carried  the  lonely  burdens  of  a  momentous  public 
trust  upon  which  the  success  of  the  first  presi 
dencies  and  the  inheritance  of  American  posterity 
turned  .<  He  had  put  down  foundations  and  erect 
ed  a  system  which  in  basic  respects  was  destined  to 
adorn  the  ages.  Speaking  of  Hamilton's  resigna 
tion  as  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  one  early 
commentator  has  said:  "The  confused  and  compli 
cated  facts  of  our  financial  condition,  furnished 

202 


(greatest  American 

from  a  thousand  different  sources,  had  come  from 
his  hand  solidified  and  transparent;  and  with 
consummate  genius  and  judgment  he  had  so  or 
ganized  the  Treasury  that  but  little  was  left  for 
his  successors  to  do  except  to  execute  his  simple 
and  comprehensive  plans."1  Indeed,  when  his 
arch-critic,  Jefferson,  became  President  in  1801 

i*j 

and  requested  Albert  Gallatin,  his  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury,  to  clean  the  Department  of  the  cor 
ruption  and  insanity  which  his  prejudice  attributed 
to  Hamilton,  this  second  ablest  American  federal 
financier,  after  microscopic  quest  for  taint,  re 
ported  to  the  White  House  that  in  no  respect  could 
the  Department  be  improved:  and  the  administra 
tions  not  only  of  Jefferson,  but  of  Madison  and 
Monroe,  both  of  the  ultimate  anti-Hamilton  cabal, 
operated  from  first  to  last  on  the  silently  accepted 
principles  and  agencies  which  were  born  of  the 
untiring  genius  of  their  erstwhile  foe. 

While  his  final  measure  for  the  redemption  of 
the  public  debt  was  on  its  passage  in  the  Congress, 
Hamilton  laid  down  his  commission  and  retired 
from  public  life.  It  was  in  1795.  Hamilton  was 
38  years  of  age,  a  youth  upon  the  calendar,  a 
patriarch  upon  the  scrolls  of  achievement.  "He 

1  Griswold's  American  Society,  1855. 

203 


Greatest  American 

had  been  in  office  nearly  six  years,"  wrote  Senator 
Lodge  in  his  biography,  "and  his  work  was  done. 
His  opinions  and  his  personality  were  indelibly 
impressed  upon  our  frame  of  government  and  upon 
our  political  development.  We  look  in  vain  for  a 
man  who,  in  an  equal  space  of  time,  has  produced 
such  direct  and  lasting  effects  upon  our  institutions 
and  our  history." 

When  Hamilton  resigned  President  Washington 
wrote  to  him  as  follows : x  "In  every  relation  which 
you  have  borne  to  me  I  have  found  that  my  con 
fidence  in  your  talents,  exertions  and  integrity  has 
been  well  placed.  I  the  more  freely  tender  this 
testimony  of  my  approbation  because  I  speak  from 
opportunities  of  information  which  cannot  de 
ceive  me  and  which  furnish  satisfactory  proof  of 
your  title  to  public  regard."  In  the  light  of  such 
credentials  from  Washington,  how  petty  and  how 
narrow  become  the  objurgatory  libels  of  such  men 
as  J.  T.  Callender,  who  chose  to  liken  Hamilton  to 
Caligula2  and  to  Alva3  as  quoted  in  Sumner's 
biography.4  The  very  depth  of  Callender 's 

1  The  Writings  of  George  Washington,  by  Jared  Sparks,  1 837. 

2  The  Prospect  Before  the  United  States,  by  Callender,  1800. 

3  The  History  of  the  United  States  for  1796,  by  Callender. 

4  Alexander  Hamilton,   by   Professor   William   Graham 
Stunner. 

204 


(greatest  American 

hatreds,  which  included  Washington  within  their 
cloudy  horizon,  caused  him  to  overshoot  his  mark; 
for  when,  as  though  to  complete  his  indictment,  he 
bitterly  complained  that  Hamilton  "is  the  first  and 
only  favorite  whom  General  Washington  ever  had," 
posterity  leaps  to  the  embrace  of  that  bromidic 
philosophy  which  would  say  of  Hamilton — "We 
love  him  for  his  foes." 

Professor  David  Kinley  in  his  History  of  the 
Treasury  of  the  United  States  refers  to  Hamilton  as 
the  man  who  "established  financial  order"  and  who 
"on  the  solid  foundation  of  re-established  credit" 
started  the  country  "in  the  direction  of  industrial 
and  commercial  prosperity."  He  quotes  approv 
ingly  the  eloquent  words  of  Daniel  Webster  who 
said  of  Hamilton  years  later:  "He  was  made 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury  and  how  he  fulfilled  the 
duties  of  such  a  place,  at  such  a  time,  the  whole 
country  perceived  with  delight,  and  the  whole  world 
saw  with  admiration.  He  smote  the  rock  of  na 
tional  resources,  and  abundant  streams  of  revenue 
gushed  forth.  He  touched  the  dead  corpse  of  the 
public  credit,  and  it  sprung  upon  its  feet." 


tn  Utterature  anb  Hato 


IN  the  arts  and  in  the  practice  of  his  chosen, 
private  profession,  Alexander  Hamilton  was  the 
same  comprehensive  master  that  he  was  in  states 
manship  and  in  finance.  In  literature  and  law  he 
was  equally  at  home.  His  forensic  address,  with 
tongue  or  pen,  was  hypnotic  in  its  compelling 
sorcery.  That  his  writings  earned  the  highest 
literary  status,  though  dedicated  exclusively  to 
homilies  upon  such  dry  texts  as  problems  in  gov 
ernment  afford,  is  rare  testimonial  to  the  culture 
that  could  clothe  such  ordinary  subjects  in  extra 
ordinary  purity  and  charm.  In  powers  of  expres 
sion,  in  these  respects,  he  was  the  equal  of  Presi 
dent  Wilson  in  our  own  time  —  and  this  is  supremely 
suggestive  modern  parallel.  That  his  address, 
upon  the  platform,  in  the  forum  or  before  the 
courts,  was  rich  with  an  impressive  eloquence  which 
dominated  the  emotions  and  the  minds  of  men  be 
neath  its  spell,  is  testified  alike  by  his  contem 
porary  historians  and  by  the  fruits  of  his  appeals. 

206 


American 


That  he  could  perfect  himself  to  prime  recognition 
in  the  letter  and  the  practice  of  the  law,  despite 
the  multitude  of  other  diverting  responsibilities 
which  were  alike  the  burden  and  the  crown  of  his 
career,  bears  witness  to  the  native  intellect  and 
industry  which  were  his  endowment.  He  was  and 
is  American  society's  great,  outstanding  exception 
to  that  favorite  definition  which  insists  that  genius 
is  merely  the  ability  to  do  one  thing  well. 

As  a  lad,  Hamilton's  literary  genius  forced  itself 
to  early  display.  One  juvenile  effort  in  particular 
has  been  preserved  to  posterity  as  an  evidence,  in 
the  boy  of  15,  of  the  talent  and  predilections  in 
this  respect  which  ultimately  were  to  challenge 
the  world's  applause.  In  1722  a  furious  tornado 
swept  over  the  Leeward  Islands  and  wrought  ruin 
and  desolation  amid  the  West  Indies  and  young 
Hamilton's  boyhood  home.  So  terrible  was  the 
catastrophe  that  the  stoutest  hearts  were  awed.  A 
strikingly  picturesque  and  colorful  report  of  the 
hurricane  appeared  in  the  public  journal  of  the 
Island  of  St.  Christopher.  Its  merit  was  so  pro 
nounced  that  compelling  public  inquiry,  unsatisfied 
with  its  anonymous  authorship,  sought  out  the 
youth  who  owned  so  vivid  and  inspired  a  pen  and 
decorated  him  with  encomiums  prophetic  of  the 

207 


(greatest  American 

literary    laurels    to    come    with    the    unfolding 
years. 

At  the  age  of  17  he  dedicated  this  pen  to  the 
cause  of  American  Freedom.  When  the  ablest 
Tory  critics  collaborated  in  two  pamphlets  attack 
ing  the  Continental  Congress,  young  Hamilton 
came  anonymously  to  the  defense  of  his  distraught 
fellow-patriots  with  a  brilliant  answer.  It  was 
issued  in  December,  1774,  and  was  entitled  "A 
full  vindication  of  the  measures  of  congress  from 
the  calumnies  of  their  enemies,  in  answer  to  a 
letter  under  the  signature  of  a  West  Chester 
farmer,  whereby  his  sophistry  is  exposed,  his  cavils 
confuted,  his  artifices  detected,  and  his  wit  ridi 
culed."  A  short  excerpt  from  this  essay,  confessing 
exaggerated,  juvenile  enthusiasm  of  expression  yet 
showing,  clear  as  crystal,  the  sturdy  American 
philosophies  which  ruled  Hamilton's  life,  is  re 
ported  as  follows:  "Tell  me  not  of  the  British 
commons,  lords,  ministers,  ministerial  tools,  place 
men,  pensioners,  parasites — I  scorn  to  let  my  life 
and  property  depend  upon  the  pleasure  of  any  of 
them.  Give  me  the  steady,  uniform,  unshaken 
security  of  constitutional  freedom — give  me  the 
right  of  trial  by  a  jury  of  my  own  neighbors,  and  to 
be  taxed  by  my  own  representatives  only.  What 

208 


<§reate*t  American 


will  become  of  the  laws  and  courts  of  justice  with 
out  this?  The  shadow  may  remain,  but  the  sub 
stance  will  be  gone.  I  would  die  to  preserve  the 
law  upon  a  solid  foundation:  for,  take  away  liberty, 
and  the  foundation  is  destroyed." 

The  Tories  replied,  with  special  effort  to  set 
farmers  against  merchants  and  thus  divide  their 
unorganized  adversaries,  Hamilton  again 
promptly  rejoined,  February,  1775,  sixty  days 
before  the  Battle  of  Lexington,  with  a  second  pam 
phlet  of  71  pages  entitled,  "The  farmer  refuted; 
or  a  more  comprehensive  and  impartial  view  of 
the  disputes  between  Great  Britain  and  the  Col 
onies,  intended  as  a  further  vindication  of  the 
Congress."  So  sensationally  and  unexpectedly 
vigorous  were  these  rejoinders  in  their  indictment 
of  Britain,  and  so  acute  the  logic  with  which  they 
defended  the  "natural  rights"  at  the  bottom  of 
the  impending  revolt,  and  so  profound  their  apos 
trophe  to  justice,  their  authorship  was  attributed 
to  William  Livingston  and  John  Jay  by  a  grateful 
and  encouraged  people.  But  it  was  neither  of 
these  able  patriots  who  held  aloft  the  lighted  torch. 
It  was  a  boy,  matured  before  his  time  to  fit  an 
emergency  in  the  tides  of  men. 

Much  of  Hamilton's  desultory  but  illuminating 
14  209 


(greatest  American 


private  correspondence  during  the  years  of  war 
fortunately  has  been  preserved.  It  reflects  his 
constantly  growing  powers  of  expression  and  his 
constantly  expanding  grasp  of  new  America's  prob 
lem,  even  as,  in  its  more  intimate  aspects,  it  con 
fesses  the  warm-hearted  humanities  that  were  warp 
and  woof  to  his  soul.  Incidentally,  of  course,  all 
of  Washington's  famous  letters  and  papers  which 
attracted  widespread  favor  to  their  author,  during 
the  entire  period  of  Hamilton's  service  on  his  staff, 
were  the  actual  artisanry  of  the  young  aide.  Fol 
lowing  close  upon  the  heels  of  this  period,  Hamilton 
wrote  (1781)  six  papers  which,  combined  in  "The 
Continentalist,"  were  an  epitomized  prologue  to 
his  subsequent  "  Federalist."  His  breadth  of 
understanding  was  now  becoming  seriously  im 
pressive  to  his  country.  Since  "The  Continental 
ist,"  written  before  the  Constitution  had  been 
framed,  is  essentially  an  advance  miniature  of 
"The  Federalist,"  written  in  defense  of  the  Con 
stitution  when  completed,  it  may  be  fairly  judged 
from  this  continuity  of  thought  how  amply  the  Con 
stitution  satisfied  Hamilton's  basic  views:  and  since 
"The  Federalist  "has  been  analyzed  at  length  in  an 
other  chapter,  it  suffices  to  pass  "The  Continental 
ist"  with  a  quotation  of  its  concluding  apostrophe. 

210 


(greatest  American 

"There  is  something  noble  and  magnificent  in 
the  perspective  of  a  great,  Federal  Republic, 
closely  linked  in  the  pursuit  of  a  common  interest, 
tranquil  and  prosperous  at  home,  respectable 
abroad,  but  there  is  something  proportionately 
diminutive  and  contemptible  in  the  prospect  of  a 
number  of  petty  states,  with  the  appearance  only 
of  Union,  jarring,  jealous,  and  perverse,  without 
any  determined  direction,  fluctuating  and  unhappy 
at  home,  weak  and  insignificant  by  their  dissen 
sions  in  the  eyes  of  other  nations.  .  .  .  Happy 
America  if  those  to  whom  thou  hast  intrusted  the 
guardianship  of  thy  infancy  know  how  to  provide 
for  thy  future  repose,  but  miserable  and  undone  if 
their  negligence  or  ignorance  permits  the  spirit  of 
discord  to  erect  her  banners  on  the  ruins  of  thy 
tranquillity!" 

Truly,  in  the  language  of  the  poet,  "his  pen  be 
came  a  clarion ! "  From  this  point  on,  there  are  no 
other  writings  from  any  other  source  in  the  whole 
history  of  the  Revolution's  literature,  and  there 
after  for  a  quarter  of  a  century,  that  approach  the 
works  of  Hamilton  in  conception  or  expression. 

Writing  over  the  signature  of  "Phocion"— it 
was  the  universal  habit  of  the  time  thus  to  borrow 
sobriquets — Hamilton  issued  two  vigorous  pam- 

211 


<&reate*t  American 

phlets  in  1784-85  when  a  storm  of  post-war  venge 
ance  against  ex-Tories  was  sweeping  New  York 
into  indefensible  excesses.  He  never  consulted 
expediency  when  a  wrong  demanded  challenge. 
He  was  always  inspired  with  a  sublime  indifference 
to  anything  but  truth  and  right.  He  would  not 
"keep  the  word  of  promise  to  the  ear  and  break  it 
to  the  hope."1  Charlatanism  and  demagogy  he 
abhorred.  There  never  was  music  to  his  ears  in  the 
plaudits  of  a  mistaken  mob.  These  pamphlets 
of  "Phocion,"  done  in  his  usual  irrefutable  style, 
demanded  obedience  to  law  and  order  and  the 
acknowledgment  of  every  Treaty  obligation  in 
dealings  with  persons  and  properties  that  may 
have  served  the  King.  He  was  unanswerable  in 
logic;  wherefore  some  among  his  enemies  proposed 
to  silence  him  by  successive  challenges  to  duels 
until  he  should  be  killed.  But  this  rash  project 
was  abandoned.  His  assassination  could  not  come 
for  20  years,  because  America,  destined  to  survive, 
could  not  spare  his  controlling  genius. 

"Phocion's"  letters  were  daring;  but  as  sound 
as  they  were  courageous.  They  were  based  upon 
a  conception  of  responsibility  in  the  leadership  of 
those  important  times  which  distinguishes  states- 

1  Macbeth. 

212 


(Sreatesrt  American 

manship  from  politics  and  which  contemplates  the 
next  generation  instead  of  the  next  election. 
"Phocion"  concluded  his  final  letter,  in  part,  as 
follows : 

"Those  who  are  at  present  intrusted  with  power 
in  all  these  infant  Republics,  hold  the  most  sacred 
deposit  that  ever  was  confided  to  human  hands. 
It  is  with  governments  as  with  individuals,  first 
impressions  and  early  habits  give  a  lasting  bias  to 
the  temper  and  character.  Our  governments 
hitherto  have  no  habits.  How  important  to  the 
happiness,  not  of  America  alone,  but  of  mankind, 
that  they  should  acquire  good  ones!  If  we  set 
out  with  justice,  moderation,  liberality,  and  a 
scrupulous  regard  to  the  Constitution,  the  Govern 
ment  will  acquire  a  spirit  and  tone  productive  of 
permanent  blessings  to  the  community.  If,  on 
the  contrary,  the  public  councils  are  guided  by 
humor,  passion  and  prejudice — if,  from  resent 
ment  to  individuals  or  a  dread  of  partial  incon 
venience,  the  Constitution  is  slighted  or  explained 
away  upon  every  frivolous  pretext — the  future 
spirit  of  government  will  be  feeble,  distracted  and 
arbitrary.  The  rights  of  the  subject  will  be  the 
sport  of  every  vicissitude.  There  will  be  no 
settled  rule  of  conduct,  but  every  thing  will  fluctu- 

213 


Neatest  American 

ate  with  the  alternate  prevalency  of  contending 
factions.  The  world  has  its  eye  upon  America. 
The  noble  struggle  we  have  made  in  the  cause  of 
liberty,  has  occasioned  a  kind  of  revolution  in 
human  sentiment.  The  influence  of  our  example 
has  penetrated  the  gloomy  regions  of  despotism, 
and  has  pointed  the  way  to  inquiries  which  may 
shake  it  to  its  deepest  foundations.  ...  To 
ripen  inquiry  into  action,  it  remains  for  us  to  justify 
the  Revolution  by  its  fruits.  If  the  consequences 
prove  that  we  have  really  asserted  the  cause  of 
human  happiness,  what  may  not  be  expected  from 
so  illustrious  an  example?  In  a  greater  or  less 
degree,  the  world  will  bless  and  imitate.  But  if 
experience,  in  this  instance,  verifies  the  lesson  long 
taught  by  the  enemies  of  liberty — that  the  bulk  of 
mankind  are  not  fit  to  govern  themselves — that 
they  must  have  a  master,  and  were  only  made  for 
the  rein  and  the  spur — we  shall  then  see  the  final 
triumph  of  despotism  over  liberty.  The  advo 
cates  of  the  latter  must  acknowledge  it  to  be  an 
ignis  fatuus  and  abandon  the  pursuit.  With  the 
greatest  advantages  for  promoting  it  that  ever  a 
people  had,  we  shall  have  betrayed  the  cause  of 
human  nature!  Let  those  in  whose  hands  it  is 
placed,  pause  for  a  moment  and  contemplate  with 

214 


(greatest  American 

an  eye  of  reverence  the  vast  trust  committed  to 
them.  Let  them  retire  into  their  own  bosoms  and 
examine  the  motives  which  there  prevail!" 

The  arts  of  exhortation  never  touched  a  higher 
mark  than  in  these  inspired  passages.  It  is  easy 
to  understand  that  such  leadership  was  inevitably 
sure  to  put  its  trademark  upon  the  conscience 
of  the  times.  Two  years  after  "  PhoiiQjilL  came 
"  T^e.JEederali&t-r'  This  tremendous  collection  of 
patriotic  homilies  has  been  treated  in  detail  else 
where  in  this  volume.  The  first  draft  of  the  first 
paper  was  prepared  in  the  cabin  of  a  little  vessel 
while  Hamilton  was  gliding  down  the  Hudson ;  but 
the  last  echo  of  the  last  paper  will  not  die  out— 
either  as  a  matter  of  literature  or  as  a  matter  of 
law — so  long  as  the  American  Constitution  of  which 
it  was  the  supreme  contemporary  interpretation 
survives.  The  Edinburgh  Review  (No.  24)  said: 
"The  Federalist  .  .  .  exhibits  an  extent  and 
precision  of  information,  a  profundity  of  research, 
and  an  accurateness  of  understanding,  which 
would  have  done  honor  to  the  most  illustrious 
statesman  of  ancient  or  modern  times."  Black- 
wood's  Magazine,  four  decades  later1  said:  "It  is  a 
work  altogether  which,  for  comprehensiveness  of 

1  January,  1825. 

215 


(greatest  American 

design,  strength,  clearness  and  simplicity,  has  no 
parallel.  We  do  not  even  except  or  overlook 
Montesquieu  and  Aristotle  among  the  writings 
of  men."  Beside  such  compliments  as  these  my 
own  observations  are  absolved  of  extravagance. 
As  regards  legal  scope  and  value  in  "The  Federal 
ist,"  there  could  be  no  more  superlative  praise 
than  that  pronounced  by  the  greatest  of  all  Ameri 
can  jurists,  Chief  Justice  Marshall  of  the  United 
States  Supreme  Court,  who  referred  to  "The 
Federalist"  in  deciding  the  case  of  Cohens  vs. 
Virginia  as  follows :  "It  is  a  complete  commentary 
on  our  Constitution,  and  is  appealed  to  by  all 
parties  in  the  questions  to  which  that  instrument 
has  given  birth. ' '  When  these  words  were  uttered, 
Madison's  journal  had  not  yet  been  published, 
disclosing  an  authentic  record  of  the  debates  in 
the  Constitutional  Convention.  But  the  subse 
quent  appearance  of  this  other  great  reference 
authority  does  not  dilute  the  force  of  Justice 
Marshall's  compliment  because,  within  the  pres 
ent  generation,  a  great  modern  jurist,  whose  name 
I  am  not  at  liberty  to  quote,  has  made  similar 
acknowledgment  to  me  in  no  less  certain  language. 
"'The  Federalist'  has  come  to  stand  on  our 
shelves,  next  to  the  Constitution,  as  the  first  great 

216 


(greatest  American 

text-book  upon  it,"  another  authority  has  written. 1 
Says  another  competent  historian:2  "It  holds  the 
same  high  place  in  American  literature  which  the 
letters  of  Junius  and  the  reflections  of  Burke  on 
the  French  Revolution,  occupy  in  British  litera 
ture.  .  .  .  Shortly  after  its  first  appearance,  it 
was  translated  into  French  by  M.  Buisson,  and 
published  in  Paris.  In  that  country  it  has  taken 
its  place  by  the  side  of  Montesquieu's  Spirit  of 
Laws.  It  has  been  republished  in  Switzerland, 
and  has  been  there  honored  as  the  worthy  asso 
ciate  of  the  great  work  of  Burlamaqui  on  the  same 
subject.  It  is  known  and  appreciated  in  every 
country  of  Europe,  just  in  proportion  as  the  liberty 
of  the  press  and  liberty  of  speech  are  possessed  and 
enjoyed."  In  a  word,  borrowing  still  another  ac 
knowledged  authority3  "The  Federalist"  was  "a 
literary  monument  great  enough  for  any  man  and 
any  nation." 

In   1793  Hamilton's  virile  and  unconquerable 
pen  faced  another  critical  task.     The  excitable 

1  Alexander   Hamilton,    by    Professor   William   Graham 
Sumner. 

2  Life  and  Times  of  Alexander  Hamilton,  by  Samuel  H. 
Schmucker,  1856. 

3  Essays,  Historical  and  Literary,  Vol.  I,  by  John  Fiske. 

217 


rJ 


(greatest  American 


affections  of  mass  Americans  who  loved  France, 
plus  the  equally  inflammable  hatreds  nursed 
toward  England,  made  the  enforcement  of  Wash 
ington's  proclamation  of  neutrality  delicately  diffi 
cult  when  this  erstwhile  friend  and  foe  locked  in 
war's  embrace.  Strong  men  opposed  it  vigorously. 
It  had  been  Hamilton's  idea,  accepted  by  Wash 
ington  in  preference  to  Jefferson's  desire  to  fling 
the  whole  prickly  mess  into  an  extra  session  of  the 
Congress.  Madison  declared  it  injurious  to  "the 
national  honor  by  seeming  to  disregard  the  stipu 
lated  duties  to  France"  and  said  it  would  wound 
"the  popular  feelings  by  seeming  indifference  to 
the  cause  of  liberty."  Jefferson  called  it  an 
"English  neutrality."  Citizen  Genet,  coming 
from  a  commune  in  which  government  was  but  a 
parody,  presumed  that  he  was  entitled  to  harangue 
Americans,  regardless  of  the  posture  of  or  license 
from  their  government.  The  situation  was  fraught 
with  menace,  within  and  without.  But  Washing 
ton  and  Hamilton  were  determined  that  the  United 
States  should  stand  free  from  foreign  entangle 
ments  that  might  incline  our  destiny  to  the  vicissi 
tudes  of  European  war  and  politics.  It  was  not 
that  they  loved  France  less  or  favored  England. 
Rather  it  was  that  they  loved  America  more,  and 

218 


(greatest  American 

scorned  the  French  Revolution's  trend  from  liberty 
to  wanton  anarchy.  To  defend  this  mighty  policy 
so  prophetic  in  the  precedent  it  set  for  the  benefit 
of  American  political  isolation  for  a  century  to 
follow,  Hamilton  again  unlimbered  the  batteries 
of  his  prolific,  burning  essays.  Now  he  wrote  as 
"Pacificus,"  defending  neutrality  and  the  whole 
foreign  policy  which  had  brought  down  radical 
anathema  upon  President  Washington's  head. 
These  letters,  writes  a  brilliant  critic,1  "  apart 
from  their  special  argument  on  the  facts,  will  ever 
remain  a  classic  of  wise,  dignified,  illusionless, 
unprocati ve  statesmanship . ' '  They  functioned 
admirably  to  challenge  the  sober  second  thought 
of  thinking  men  and  were  the  great  expression  of 
the  first  great  foreign  policy  laid  down  for  the  con 
duct  of  the  United  States.  They  were  followed 
by  the  letters  of  " Americanus"  in  February,  1794, 
in  not  unsimilar  vein;  "Horatius"  in  1795,  and 
then  by  "Camillus,"  writing  his  famous  defense 
of  the  inflammable  Jay  Treaty  with  England. 
Never,  except  when  he  wrote  "The  Federalist," 
had  Hamilton  pleaded  a  more  difficult  cause  or 
faced  greater  obstacles.  Yet,  never  did  he  write 
with  more  inspired  success.  ' '  Camillus ' '  consisted 
1  Oliver's  Alexander  Hamilton. 

219 


(greatest  American 

of  forty  letters,  occupying  not  less  than  one  hun 
dred  newspaper  columns.  Thirty-two  were  writ 
ten,  and  all  were  inspired,  by  Hamilton.  The 
remaining  eight  were  the  contribution  of  Rufus 
King.  Modern  commentators  will  marvel  that 
the  public  mind  could  be  held  to  such  exhaustive 
and  profound  analysis  as  the  letters  of  "Camil- 
lus"  represent.  It  is  a  demonstration  of  the  high 
order  of  mass  intelligence  which  prevailed  in  col 
onial  America.  To-day  "Camillus"  would  find 
audience  only  in  some  erudite  review  with  a  read 
ing  circle  limited  to  careful  students  of  structural 
government  and  the  science  of  public  relations. 
We  are  too  far  removed  from  the  travail  which 
gave  our  blessed  institutions  birth  to  be  intent, 
as  a  mass,  upon  our  public  studies.  It  was  differ 
ent  then;  and  Hamilton  was  without  a  rival  in 
these  arts  of  controversy.  The  letters  of  "Camil- 
lus"  remain  today  as  our  most  powerful  message 
against  "government  by  weak  and  vague  words; 
against  the  policy  of  drift,  which  possesses  neither 
the  courage  to  foresee  results  nor  the  energy  to 
prepare  for  them;  against  those  people,  arguing 
interminably  to  delay  action,  who  grudge  every 
sacrifice  whether  its  object  be  peace  or  war,  and 
who  denounce  with  the  same  cantankerous 

220 


(greatest  American 


hostility  all  preparations   as    aggressive  and  all 
concessions  as  cowardice."1 

The  final  and  crowning  tribute  to  Hamilton's 
genius  as  a  prophet  and  an  inspired  scribe  is 
Washington's  Farewell  Address.  This  sublime 
valedictory  —  the  parting  admonition  of  a  Father 
to  his  children  —  has  lived  with  the  Declaration  of 
Independence  as  one  of  the  richest  admonitory  ' 
inheritances  bequeathed  to  posterity  by  the  his 
tory  of  America's  foundation.  Though  times  and 
conditions  and  necessities,  at  home  and  abroad, 
have  changed  with  the  crowding  years,  Washing 

ton's  Farewell  Address  remains  constant  in  the 

v 
wisdom  and  the  utility  of  its  wholesome  creeds. 

It  is  often  remarked  that  nothing  else  so  eloquently 
testifies  to  the  mental  stature  of  the  men  who  put  ' 
down  America's  foundations  as  this  continuous 
timeliness  in  the  sage  and  lofty  words  with  which 
Washington  bade  his  countrymen  an  official  adieu. 
It  takes  nothing  from  Washington's  sure,  safe  pos 
ture  in  America's  historical  affections  to  concede 
that  the  actual  authorship  of  this  immortal  docu 
ment  was  the  work  of  Hamilton.  Such  was  the 
indisputable  fact. 

When  Washington  was  drawing  to  the  end  of 

1  Oliver's  Alexander  Hamilton. 

221 


(greatest  American 

his  forty-five  years  of  mighty  service  to  the  country 
he  had  led  from  bondage,  Hamilton  suggested 
to  him  the  idea  of  a  final  message  of  composite 
counsel.  The  President  promptly  approved  the 
fortunate  suggestion.  Never  did  the  instincts 
of  two  men  run  in  closer  or  more  constant 
harmony.  Washington  sketched  the  headings 
under  which  he  would  desire  to  group  his  observa 
tions  and  requested  Hamilton,  as  was  his  tradi 
tional  custom  in  such  circumstances,  to  prepare 
the  draft.  Mrs.  Hamilton  has  testified  in  a  letter 
dated  August  7,  1840,*  that  her  husband  read 
practically  the  entire  address  to  her;  that  when 
it  had  been  submitted  to  Washington  for  his 
approval  and  returned  for  final  revision,  it  had 
been  accepted  verbatim  with  the  exception  of 
a  single  paragraph  of  five  lines.  Thus  it  was  deliv 
ered  to  the  ages  on  September  19,  1796.  It  lives 
as  a  monument  to  Washington.  But  it  deserves 
equally  to  stand  as  a  monument  to  the  intellectual 
giant  who  sponsored  and  prepared  its  text.2  The 

1  Reported  in  The  Conqueror,  by  Gertrude  Atherton. 

2  Washington  Irving's  Life  of  Washington  says,  in  part, 
upon  this  subject:  "It  appears  from  these  communications 
(between  Washington  and  Hamilton)  that  the  President, 
both  in  sending  him  (Hamilton)  a  rough  draft  of  the  docu 
ment  and  at  previous  dates,  requested  him  to  prepare  such 

222 


(greatest  American 

spirit  of  the  Address  belongs  equally  to  both  be 
cause  both  had  been  life  collaborators  in  the 
experiences,  the  labors,  the  sacrifices  and  the  con 
clusions  which  the  Address  personified.  "But 
what  gives  it  a  universal  value  and  places  it  per 
manently  in  the  literature  of  the  world,  is  the  mind 
of  Hamilton  and  not  the  character  of  Washington. 
It  is  no  disparagement  to  the  fame  of  one  who  was 
a  great  soldier  and  a  wise  ruler  to  deny  him  a  fur 
ther  reward  to  which  he  himself  would  never  have 
laid  claim."1  Most  historical  commentators  con 
tent  themselves  with  a  formula  which  inconspicu 
ously  observes  that  Washington  sought  Hamilton's 
"criticism"  of  the  address  and  that  its  ultimate 
appearance  followed  "much  revision  by  both."2 

an  address  as  he  thought  would  be  appropriate  to  the  occa 
sion;  that  Washington  consulted  him  particularly,  and  most 
minutely,  on  many  points  connected  with  it;  and  that  at 
different  times  General  Hamilton  did  forward  to  The  Presi 
dent  three  drafts  of  such  a  paper.  The  first  was  sent  back 
to  him  with  suggestions  for  its  correction  and  enlargement ; 
from  the  second  draft,  thus  altered  and  improved,  the  manu 
script  now  printed  may  be  supposed  to  have  been  prepared 
by  Washington,  and  transmitted  for  final  examination  to 
General  Hamilton  and  Judge  Jay;  and  with  it,  the  third 
draft  was  returned  to  the  President  and  may  probably  yet 
be  found  among  his  papers." 

1  Oliver's  Alexander  Hamilton. 

2  Harvard  Classics,  Vol.  43. 

223 


Greatest  American 

But  any  close  student  of  the  inimitable  writings  of 
"Publics/'  "Pacificus"  and  "Camillus"  will  con 
sent  that  the  testimony  of  Hamilton's  widow  is 
correct.  Their  pen  wrote  the  Farewell  Address 
and  water-marked  it  with  an  atmosphere,  a  culture 
and  a  facility  of  phrase  which  is  as  undeniable  in 
source  as  though  the  confession  were  openly  ac 
knowledged  in  a  postscript.  Three  solemn  warn 
ings  are  uttered  in  the  Farewell  Address:  first, 
against  any  weakening  of  the  Union;  second, 
against  the  growth  of  faction;  third,  against  foreign 
entanglements.  These  philosophies  were  basic  in  the 
common  doctrines  of  both  Washington  and  Hamil 
ton.  Together  they  bequeathed  them  to  grateful 
posterity.  But  from  the  beginning  to  the  end, 
Hamilton  was  their  supreme  oracle  and  tribune. 
The  Farewell  Address  is  Washington's:  but  first 
of  all  it  is  the  soul  of  Alexander  Hamilton. 


The  story  of  Hamilton,  the  lawyer,  is  one  more 
repetition  of  prodigy.  Likewise,  it  is  repetition  of 
the  proofs  that  even  in  this  private  profession, 
he  was  first  and  always  the  good  citizen,  the  faith 
ful  friend,  the  dependable  patriot.  From  still  an 
other  angle,  we  glimpse  the  sterling  mark  in  the 

224 


dlreatetft  American 

character  and  genius  of  this  rare  American  whose 
diversity  of  talents  and  services  rendered  defies 
successful  competition  in  any  age,  in  any  land. 

Hamilton  was  admitted  to  the  bar  when  he  was 
twenty -five  years  of  age.  For  four  intensive 
months  he  concentrated  his  uncannily  retentive 
mind  upon  a  legal  education  and  qualified  for  an 
attorney's  license  which  no  less  brilliant  a  mental 
ity  than  that  of  Aaron  Burr  could  not  justify 
at  the  same  examinations,  though  favored  with 
two  years  of  study.  Indeed,  Burr's  ultimate,  fatal 
and  insatiate  jealousy  of  Hamilton  may  be  traced 
to  seeds  that  rooted  in  this  legal  kindergarten 
in  Albany  in  1782.  Hamilton's  achievement 
astounded  the  legal  profession,  composed  at  that 
time  largely  of  exceptional  men,  and  prophesied 
the  subsequent  leadership  which  gave  him  unques 
tioned  pre-eminence  among  the  practitioners  of 
his  maturer  years.  The  final  preliminary  compli 
ment  to  his  profound  faculties  lay  in  his  publication 
of  a  Manual  on  the  Practice  of  Law  immediately 
upon  his  admission  to  the  bar. 

One  year  later  he  removed  to  New  York  and 

devoted  three  uninterrupted  years  to  the  practice 

of  his  much-loved  profession.     Fate  afforded  him 

prompt  opportunity  to  vindicate  his  life-long  doc- 

15  225 


Greatest  American 

trines  that  the  Law  and  the  Courts  must  take 
counsel  of  Justice  only,  regardless  of  passing  preju 
dice  or  passion  which  might  dictate  expedient  sub 
mission  to  the  temper  of  the  mob.  On  the  heels 
of  victory  over  Britain  came  a  storm  of  hostility  to 
all  Tory  interests  in  the  Colonies.  In  direct  con 
travention  of  the  Treaty  of  Peace,  this  greed  for 
vengeance  lured  the  New  York  legislature  into 
passing  a  Trespass  Act  which  gave  a  right  of  ac 
tion  to  those  whose  property  had  been  occupied 
during  the  war  by  adherents  of  the  British  Crown. 
A  test  case,  clothed  in  all  the  favorite  aspects  of 
sentimentalism,  involved  action,  under  this  statute, 
by  a  poor  widow  who  sued  a  rich  ex-Tory  mer 
chant.  All  the  passion  of  the  throng  leaped  to 
embrace  the  widow's  cause.  It  became  the  ready 
vehicle  for  their  vendetta.  Refusing,  as  always, 
to  surrender  his  principles  to  itinerant  clamor, 
Hamilton  argued  the  defense.  He  lifted  the  issue 
above  the  little  faction  of  the  fleeting  hour  and 
cast  it  upon  the  higher  planes  of  justice,  the  honor 
of  the  courts,  the  sanctity  of  obligation  and  the 
integrity  of  treaties.  In  a  master's  argument  he 
won  the  case.  That  anger  which  rises  always 
from  the  defeated  appetites  of  wrath,  stormed  for 
a  hectoring  period  about  the  judges  and  their  un- 

226 


(greatest  American 

popular  decree.  But  the  institution  of  the  courts 
was  vindicated,  a  dangerous  trend  was  stemmed, 
and  Hamilton's  eminence  as  an  advocate  was  fixed. 

Of  Hamilton  during  this  period  Charles  Warren, 
in  his  fine  treatise  on  the  American  Bar, J  has  said: 
"The  leadership  of  the  Bar  was  generally  assigned 
to  Alexander  Hamilton.  .  .  .  From  the  date  of 
his  first  great  case  of  Rutgers  vs.  Waddington,  in 
1784,  until  his  appointment  as  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury  in  1789,  his  legal  fame  was  pre-eminent." 

It  remained  for  Hamilton  to  clinch  this  legal 
eminence  impregnably — and,  at  the  same  time,  to 
render  unto  America  his  greatest  legal  service — 
upon  the  occasion  of  his  establishment  of  the  Na 
tional  Bank  of  the  United  States.  The  opposition 
to  this  central  banking  plan  denied  the  right  of  the 
Government,  under  the  Constitution,  to  erect  a 
national  bank.  Hamilton  promptly  invoked  the 
implied  powers  of  the  Constitution  to  sustain  his 
project.  His  ultimate  success  not  only  saved  the 
Bank,  but  it  led  to  the  promulgation  of  the  general 
doctrine  of  "implied  powers"  which  has  since  be 
come  so  formidable  and  so  essential  a  factor  in 
American  judicial  interpretation  that  it  has  been 
aptly  called  "the  chief  dynamic  principle  of  our 

1  A  History  of  the  American  Bar,  by  Charles  Warren. 

227 


(greatest  American 

Constitution."  When  Hamilton  wrote  "The 
Federalist,"  he  penned  a  creed  which  has  come  to 
have  the  reference  authority  of  statutes  and  court 
decisions  in  determining  moot  points  of  Constitu 
tional  law.  When  he  wrote  his  argument,  and 
submitted  it  to  Washington,  on  the  constitution 
ality  of  the  National  Bank,  he  marshalled  for  the 
first  time  the  principle  of  liberal  construction  and 
for  the  first  time  established  this  doctrine  of  "  im 
plied  powers"-— "the  most  formidable  weapon  in 
the  armory  of  the  Constitution."1  Judge  Story 
pronounced  Hamilton's  effort  in  this  respect  "one 
of  the  most  masterly  disquisitions  that  ever  pro 
ceeded  from  the  mind  of  man."  Hamilton  argued 
that  if  nothing  could  be  done  that  was  not  ex 
pressly  described  and  authorized,  the  Constitution 
could  never  fit  the  unforeseen  needs  of  an  expand 
ing  Union.  He  insisted  that  the  Constitution  was 
not  a  straight-jacket  for  the  strangulation  of  pro 
gress.  He  declared  that  the  Constitution  was, 
and  was  meant  to  be,  a  mere  outline  of  intent ;  and 
that  it  must  be  conceded  any  essential  and  unpro- 
hibited  authority  to  make  these  intentions  effec 
tive.  Thirty  years  later  this  same  specific 
question  of  "implied  powers,"  as  related  to  a 
1  Life  of  Hamilton,  by  Senator  Lodge. 

228 


<&reate£t  American 

federal  bank,  was  adjudicated  in  the  United  States 
Supreme  Court.  In  the  famous  case  of  McCulloch 
vs.  Maryland,  Chief  Justice  Marshall,  the  greatest 
jurist  in  the  story  of  the  nation,  sustained  every 
contention  Hamilton  had  ever  stressed  as  a  pioneer 
in  these  particulars,  and  reached  his  conclusions 
by  a  process  of  reasoning  precisely  reminiscent  of 
Hamilton's  great  argument.  "The  able  and  lumi 
nous  decision  of  the  Chief  Justice  adds  nothing  to 
the  argument  of  the  Secretary  and  takes  nothing 
from  it,  nor  is  the  work  of  the  latter  inferior  to  the 
opinion  of  the  Judge  in  clearness  and  force  of 
expression,"  wrote  Senator  Lodge  in  his  Life  of 
Hamilton.  Justice  Marshall  himself  said  "that 
there  was  nothing  in  the  whole  field  of  argument 
which  had  not  been  brought  forward  by  Hamilton 
in  his  letter  to  Washington. " 

Hamilton  often  in  his  life-time  was  discussed  as 
eligible  for  appointment  as  Chief  Justice  of  the 
Supreme  Court.  His  memorandum  on  the  doc 
trine  of  "implied  powers"  demonstrates  to  what 
profound  extent  he  possessed  capacities  and  talents 
suited  to  such  responsibility.  In  the  rush  of  other 
hard-pressing  matters,  he  dashed  off  a  constitu 
tional  doctrine  upon  which  great  political  parties 
have  since  risen  and  divided,  and  around  which 

229 


QTfje  (greatest  9mertcan 

^the  internal  contests  of  a  century  have  been  fought. 
But  the  doctrine,  born  of  Hamilton,  remains  as 
fundamental  to  American  institutions  as  is  the 
Constitution  itself. 

' '  Whatever  difference  of  opinion  may  have  existed 
as  to  the  share  of  Hamilton  in  framing  the  Constitu 
tion,"  wrote  Lewis  Henry  Boutell  in  a  privately 
printed  essay, T  "  it  has  never  been  questioned  that 
amongst  the  ablest  of  its  expounders,  he  was  the 
chief." 

When  Hamilton  laid  down  his  heavy  public  re 
sponsibilities  to  which  he  had  devoted  himself 
with  perfect,  unselfish  singleness  of  purpose  he 
returned  to  New  York  to  recuperate  his  broken 
personal  fortunes.  For  years  he  had  dedicated 
himself  and  all  his  resources  to  his  country.  He 
had  given  not  only  to  his  country,  but  also  he  had 
been  prodigally  generous  of  time  and  money  to  all 
his  friends  and  countrymen  who  sought  his  aid. 
He  was  practically  without  funds.  He  had  es 
tablished  his  country's  solvency,  but  he  had 
neglected  his  own.  He  had  exhausted  all  his  sav 
ings  and  faced  the  necessity  of  redeeming  a  fiscal 
credit  for  himself  which  he  had  besought  thereto 
fore  only  for  his  beloved  Republic.  He  returned 
1  Alexander  Hamilton,  the  Constructive  Statesman. 

230 


<6reate*t  American 

to  the  city  of  his  home  and  plunged  into  the  prac 
tice  of  his  profession.  It  is  said  of  him  that 
though  he  confronted  most  lucrative  opportunity, 
he  never  could  be  persuaded  to  accept  anything 
beyond  a  reasonable  and  modest  fee,  and  that  he 
often  refused  to  make  any  charge  at  all  against 
poor  clients.  As  a  result,  at  his  death  he  could 
leave  his  family  little  in  worldly  goods;  but  he  left 
them  a  fame  and  a  name  which  stood  as  high  in  the 
practice  of  the  law  as  it  did  in  that  multitude  of 
other  fields  in  which  he  was  the  acknowledged 
master. 

That  Hamilton  immediately  stepped  again  to 
the  head  of  a  brilliant  bar,  when  he  returned  to 
his  practice,  all  the  records  left  us  clearly  testify. 
Whether  confronting  court  or  jury,  he  was  irresist 
ibly  powerful  in  analysis  and  appeal.  Indeed, 
the  popular  imagination  was  so  dominated  by  his 
professional  genius  that  men  came  to  think  his 
appearance  in  a  case  pre-ordained  its  victory.  It 
was  not  alone  that  he  was  the  mightiest  orator  of 
his  era — felicitously  familiar  with  every  speaking 
art.  Nor  was  it  alone  that  he  was  the  most  unan 
swerable  logician  who  ever  drew  a  brief.  Behind 
his  power  was  a  compelling  personality  which 
ignored  the  natural  handicaps  of  a  short  and  un- 

231 


(Greatest  American 

impressive  stature  and  conquered  men  by  the 
sheer  dynamics  of  his  mind  and  character.!  His 
dark,  deep-set  eyes  were  coals  of  fire  when  he  was 
aroused.  His  massive,  finely  shaped  head,  with 
its  close-set  mouth  and  its  firm,  square  jaw,  seemed 
to  communicate  a  sense  of  confidence  and  convic 
tion  to  all  who  faced  him  in  an  appeal.  1  It  was  not 
only  the  influence  of  a  strong  nature,  it  was  like 
wise  the  soul  of  an  impeccably  honest  man  which 
challenged  dominion.  It  was  his  relentless  fidelity 
to  his  trusts — exemplified,  finally,  by  the  fact  that 
he  devoted  the  last  days  of  his  life  to  concluding 
the  business  of  his  clients,  rather  than  in  com 
posing  his  own  affairs.  But  always,  at  the  root, 
was  a  knowledge  of  the  law  and  a  natural  in 
terpretive  talent  which  gave  him  perfect  com 
mand  of  every  situation  which  he  undertook  to 
govern. 

There  could  be  no  higher  authority  upon  a  mat 
ter  of  this  character  than  famous  Chancellor  James 
Kent,  the  great  American  jurist  who  conspicu 
ously  served  New  York  State  in  various  vital 
capacities  throughout  Hamilton's  period  and  for 
many  years  thereafter.  His  judicial  attainments 
won  for  him  a  permanent  place  in  the  estimates  of 
both  America  and  England  and  his  judgments  in 

232 


(greatest  American 

chancery  law  covered  such  a  wide  range  of  topics 
and  were  so  throughly  considered  and  developed  as 
unquestionably  to  form*/ the  basis  of  American 
equity  jurisprudence.  Kent  said  of  Hamilton, 
whom  he  warmly  admired: 

"  Among  all  his  brethren,  Colonel  Hamilton  was 
indisputably  pre-eminent.  This  was  universally 
conceded.  He  rose  at  once  to  loftiest  heights  of 
professional  eminence  by  his  profound  penetration, 
his  power  of  analysis,  the  comprehensive  grasp 
and  strength  of  his  understanding,  and  the  firm 
ness,  frankness  and  superiority  of  his  character. 
.  .  .  He  was  employed  in  every  .  .  .  impor 
tant  case.  .  .  .  He  taught  us  all  how  to  probe 
deeply  into  the  hidden  recesses  of  the  science,  or  to  / 
follow  up  principles  to  their  far  distant  sources. 
.  .  .  Although  the  New  York  Bar  could  at  that 
time  boast  of  the  clear  intellect,  the  candor,  the 
simplicity  and  black-letter  learning  of  the  elder 
Jones,  the  profound  and  richly  varied  learning  of 
Harrison,  the  classical  taste  and  elegant  accom 
plishments  of  Brockholst  Livingston,  the  solid 
and  accurate,  but  unpretending,  common  law 
learning  of  Troup,  the  chivalrous  feelings  and 
dignified  address  of  Pendleton,  yet  the  mighty 
mind  of  Hamilton  would  at  times  bear  down  all 

233 


w 


(greatest  amencan 


ftf 


opposition  by  its  comprehensive  grasp  and  the 
strength  of  his  reasoning  powers.   .    .    .     We  may 


*\ 

say  of  him,  in  reference  to  his  associates,  as  was 
said  of  Papinian;  'Omnes  longo  post  se  intervallo 
reliquerit.'" 

We  have  an  even  more  concrete  expression  from 
Kent,  commenting  on  Hamilton's  conduct  in  the 
famous  Croswell  case,  which  may  be  cited  as  typify 
ing  Hamilton's  labors  at  the  bar.  Croswell  was 
the  editor  of  an  obscure  Federalist  journal  which 
...  charged  that  Jefferson  had  paid  Callender  to 
slander  Washington  and  Adams.  The  same  charge 
had  appeared  in  other  larger  and  more  substantial 
journals,  but  Croswell  was  picked  by  Democratic 
leaders,  bent  upon  curbing  the  stinging  attacks 
of  their  adversaries,  as  the  man  of  whom  an  ex 
ample  could  most  easily  be  made  for  the  benefit  of 
its  effect  upon  the  entire  Federalist  press.  With 
palpable  disregard  for  the  rights  of  the  defendant, 
Croswell  was  prosecuted  for  libel,  before  a  Demo 
cratic  Judge,  on  an  indictment  handed  down  by  a 
Democratic  Grand  Jury.  Croswell's  counsel  asked 
for  time  to  bring  witnesses  from  Virginia  to  testify 
to  the  truth  of  the  alleged  libel;  but  the  prejudicial 
court  held  that  the  jury  were  judges  only  of  the 
fact  and  not  of  the  truth  or  intent  of  the  publica- 

234 


(greatest  American 

tion.  The  prosecution  was  pushed  relentlessly 
and  Croswell  convicted.  Immediately  a  new  trial 
was  sought  on  the  ground  of  misinstructions  by 
the  court.  The  issue  raised  the  great  question  of 
general  verdicts  on  which  Erskine  won  his  renown 
and  stemmed  the  tide  of  reactionary  violence  in 
London.1  It  attracted  Hamilton  not  only  as  a 
lawyer,  but  as  the  traditional  friend  of  a  free  press. 
He  went  to  Albany  to  make  the  principal  argu 
ment  in  Croswell's  behalf  before  the  Supreme 
Court.  He  spoke  for  six  hours,  laying  down  the 
principle  that  "the  liberty  of  the  press  consists  in 
the  right  to  publish  with  impunity  truth  with  good 
motives  and  for  justifiable  ends,  whether  it  respects 
government,  magistracy,  or  individuals."  He  not 
only  won  his  case,  but  elicited  from  Chancellor 
Kent  the  following  observations  which  are  pre 
served  in  the  notes  which  this  eminent  jurist  made 
at  the  famous  hearing.  Wrote  Kent: 

"It  was  the  greatest  forensic  effort  Hamilton 
ever  made.  He  had  bestowed  unusual  attention  on 
the  case,  and  he  came  prepared  to  discuss  the 
points  of  law  with  a  perfect  mastery  of  the  subject. 
There  was  an  unusual  solemnity  and  earnestness 
on  his  part  in  the  discussion.  He  was,  at  times, 

1  Life  of  Hamilton,  by  Senator  Lodge. 

235 


(greatest  American 

highly  impassioned  and  pathetic.  His  whole  soul 
was  enlisted  in  the  cause.  The  aspect  of  the  times 
was  portentous,  and  he  was  persuaded  that  if  he 
could  overthrow  the  high-toned  doctrine  of  the 
judge,  it  would  be  a  great  gam  to  the  liberties  of 
this  country.  .  .  .  The  anxiety  and  tenderness 
of  his  feelings,  and  the  gravity  of  his  theme,  ren 
dered  his  reflections  exceedingly  impressive.  He 
never  before  in  my  hearing  made  any  effort  in 
which  he  commanded  higher  reverence  for  his 
principles  nor  equal  admiration  for  the  power  and 
pathos  of  his  eloquence." 

Tributes  like  these,  from  Kent,  to  Hamilton's 
genius  as  a  lawyer  are  as  final  in  their  verdicts  as 
are  tributes,  from  Washington  and  Lafayette,  to 
Hamilton's  abilities  as  a  soldier.  His  resource 
ful  power  with  juries  is  typified,  in  legal  history 
and  legend,  by  the  story  of  the  Croucher  case. 
Croucher,  a  low,  dissolute  fellow,  was  chief  witness 
against  a  young  mechanic  of  good  character  whom 
Hamilton  was  defending  against  a  charge  of  having 
murdered  his  sweetheart.  It  was  well  on  toward 
midnight  when  Croucher's  cross-examination  be 
gan.  With  a  latitude  of  practice  which  we  may 
not  now  understand,  Hamilton  sent  for  two  candles 
and  placed  them  one  at  each  side  of  the  witness 

236 


box,  throwing  Croucher's  face  into  bold  but  ghastly 
relief.  "I  have  special  reasons/*  he  observed, 
"deep  reasons,  reasons  that,  when  the  real  culprit  is 
detected  and  placed  before  the  court,  will  then  be 
understood."  Amid  a  silence  which  was  more 
penetrating  than  the  roll  of  thunder,  expectant 
eyes  riveted  themselves  upon  the  man  whom 
Hamilton  so  boldly  challenged.  "The  jury  will 
mark  every  muscle  of  his  face,"  Hamilton  con 
tinued  ominously,  "every  motion  of  his  eyes.  I 
conjure  you  to  look  through  this  man's  counte 
nance  to  his  conscience."  Then,  with  piercing 
gaze  ^and  rapid  fire,  Hamilton  flung  his  embattled 
questions  upon  the  distraught  witness.  Croucher 
soon  broke  under  the  driving  pressure  of  circum 
stance  and  quiz.  He  was  soon  tangled  in  a  hope 
less  skein  of  contradictions.  He  was  soon  stripped 
of  every  pretense  and  left  as  criminally  naked  as 
was  Hamilton's  prophecy  and  aim.  The  jury 
acquitted  Hamilton's  client  without  leaving  its 
bench  and  Croucher  slunk  away  to  prove  by  sub 
sequent  crimes  the  justification  for  Hamilton's 
attack  upon  his  credibility. 

The  only  occasion  upon  which  Hamilton  ap 
peared  as  a  lawyer  in  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States  was  in  1786,  in  the  case  of  Hjylton 

237 


<@reate£t  American 

vs.  United  States.  Of  Hamilton's  argument,  Judge 
Iredell  wrote,  February  26,  I796:1 

"The  day  before  yesterday  Mr.  Hamilton  spoke 
in  our  court  attended  by  the  most  crowded  audi 
ence  I  ever  saw  there,  both  Houses  of  Congress 
being  almost  deserted  upon  the  occasion." 

Such  was  the  hold  Hamilton  had  upon  the 
imagination  and  the  respect  of  his  time.  The  mere 
suggestion  of  his  presence  sufficed  to  make  his 
forum  the  constant  magnet  for  intellectual  throngs. 
Continues  Judge  Iredell:  "Though  he  was  in  very 
ill  health,  he  spoke  with  astonishing  ability,  and  in 
a  most  pleasing  manner,  and  was  listened  to  with 
the  profoundest  attention.  His  speech  lasted 
about  three  hours/'  A  contemporary  newspaper 
account  stated:  "The  whole  of  his  argument  was 
clear,  impressive  and  classical.  The  audience 
which  was  very  numerous  and  among  whom  were 
many  foreigners  of  distinction  and  many  of  the 
members  of  Congress,  testified  the  effect  produced 
by  the  talents  of  this  great  orator  and  statesman." 


If  Hamilton  had  been  nothing  more  than  author, 

orator  and  lawyer — dominating,  as  he  did,  the  life 

1  Life  and  Letters  of  James  Iredell,  by  Griffith  J.  McRee. 

238 


(greatest  American 

of  his  country  in  respect  of  all  these  arts  for  twenty 
years — he  would  have  been  one  of  the  supreme 
products  of  American  life  and  opportunity,  without 
reference  to  any  other  fields  of  labor  and  of  service. 
The  fame  of  many  an  American  idol  rests  upon  less 
achievement  in  some  of  these  cultural  pursuits 
than  Hamilton  registered  in  all  of  them.  What, 
then,  shall  be  the  place  accorded  him  when  it  is 
realized  that  his  oratory,  his  literature  and  law 
were  but  the  by-products  of  his  life,  secondary  to 
other  aims  and  other  fundamental  undertakings ! 


239 


<£fie  (Prcat 

A  GREAT  majority  of  the  world's  heroes  have 
been  soldiers.  It  seems  to  have  been  human  na 
ture's  habit  to  abhor  war,  but  no  more  intensely 
than  to  canonize  war's  chieftains.  The  martial 
glamour  has  always  monopolized  applause .  Carlyle 
would  explain  it  as  the  result  of  man's  "gregarious, 
purblind  nature,  prompting  him  to  run,  as  dim- 
eyed  animals  do,  towards  any  glittering  object, 
were  it  but  a  scoured  tankard,  and  mistake  it  for  a 
solar  luminary."  A  more  reasonable  exegesis 
would  be  that  so  long  as  we  are  moved  by  human 
passions,  we  shall  yield  first  appreciation  to  those 
naked  virtues  of  physical  and  moral  bravery  and 
sacrifice  and  potential  martyrdom  which  are  the 
battle-field's  reversion.  Be  the  reason  what  it 
may,  the  fact  remains.  It  is  habitual  that  a  na 
tion's  great  should  be  her  soldiers.  It  is  particu 
larly  striking,  therefore,  that  American  history 
should  award  imperishable  fame  to  Alexander 
Hamilton  as  a  non-military  man  in  the  midst  of  a 

240 


(greatest  American 

military  era.  Yet,  by  the  same  token,  it  completes 
his  eligibility  to  register  the  fact  that  his  military 
prowess  was  scarcely  less  pronounced  than  his  civil 
triumphs.  The  circumstance  that  his  high  stand 
ing  as  a  soldier  has  been  swallowed  up  in  his  stand 
ing  as  a  statesman  and  a  publicist,  and  practically 
forgotten,  is  highest  tribute  to  his  civil  record; 
first,  because  he  was  a  great  soldier;  second,  be 
cause,  as  stated,  the  battle-torch  usually  out 
shines  the  student-lamp  in  historical  illuminations. 
The  truth  nevertheless  is  that,  by  every  martial 
test,  he  was  a  military  genius.  The  truth  is  that 
if  he  had  not  erected  so  many  civil  monuments  to 
his  career's  utility,  his  military  record  would  have 
stood  out  in  bold  relief  and  committed  Hamilton, 
the  soldier,  to  the  veneration  of  American  posterity. 
From  the  first  moment  that  Hamilton  made  his 
prophetic  decision  that  the  American  war  for  inde 
pendence  was  inevitable,  he  applied  his  trenchant 
zeal  to  preparing  himself  for  a  leader's  role  in  the 
approaching  battle  drama.  Because  his  brains 
were  deemed  more  valuable  to  the  revolution  than 
his  body,  he  had  short  chance  at  spectacular  ex 
ploit  ere  he  was  attached  to  Washington's  head 
quarters.  Throughout  the  period,  however,  the 
acknowledged  fact  is  that  he  was  a  shining  star  of 
16  241 


(greatest  American 

courage,  utterly  oblivious  to  danger  and  perpetu 
ally  inspiring  to  his  rugged  troops  upon  every 
occasion  which  permitted  active  service:  also  that 
he  was  a  brilliant  strategist  and  tactician,  and  the 
constant,  helpful,  dependable  confidant  of  great 
commanders  in  all  the  martial  crises  of  the  nation's 
early  life.  But  it  was  the  constant  regret  of  his 
revolutionary  years  that  he  could  not  be  spared 
from  larger  military  tasks  to  lead  men  more  often 
into  conflict.  He  longed  always  for  the  "front 
line  trench"  because  he  scorned  safety  for  himself 
when  human  lives  were  needed  on  the  altars  of  his 
country. 

No  sooner  did  the  clouds  of  Lexington  and 
Bunker  Hill  pall  the  colonial  horizon  than  Hamil 
ton  flung  himself  with  avid  resolution  into  the 
" Hearts  of  Oak,"  a  corps  of  New  York  volunteers, 
whose  leathern  caps  read  "Freedom  or  Death." 
Swiftly  he  proved  his  mettle;  and  when  the  New 
York  Convention  ordered  that  a  company  of  artil 
lery  be  raised,  Hamilton  qualified  as  Captain.  He 
was  commissioned  March  14,  1776,  at  the  age  of 
nineteen,  a  man  among  men  as  tested  by  the  hard 
est  standards  known  to  human  intercourse.  A 
liberal  portion  of  the  last  remittance  he  received 
from  the  generous  friends  back  in  his  old  island- 

242 


The  first  meeting  between  George  Washington  and  Hamilton 

From  the  picture  by  Chappell 


<@reate*t  American 

home,  he  appropriated  to  the  recruiting  and  equip 
ping  of  his  company.  He  had  no  resource  which 
he  did  not  dedicate  to  his  America.  His  command 
was  soon  conspicuous  for  excellence.  It  attracted 
the  attention  of  General  Greene,  whom  Hamilton 
later  declared  to  have  been  the  first  soldier  of  the 
Revolution.  This  good  opinion  was  reciprocated. 
Indeed,  it  was  Greene  who  introduced  Hamilton 
to  Washington — the  most  momentous  juncture  in 
the  story  of  the  nation — the  threshold  of  a  partner 
ship  which  carried  American  freedom  on  its  shoul 
ders  through  twenty  years  of  critical  decision. 
That  Hamilton  was  a  brilliant  soldier  did  not 
wait  long  for  proofs.  Mars  baptized  him  on  one 
of  the  bloodiest  battle-fields  of  the  Revolution. 
The  Declaration  of  Independence  at  last  had  stirred 
the  reluctant  Howe  to  British  action.  The  clash 
came  with  dawn  of  August  28,  1776,  in  the  Battle 
of  Long  Island.  Hamilton's  valiant  artillery  was 
in  the  thick  of  sanguinary  contact  up  to  the  hour 
when  Washington  determined  upon  that  masterly 
retreat  which  won  him  world  credit  as  a  strategist 
equal  no  less  to  salvaging  defeat  than  to  plotting 
victory.  Then  it  fell  to  Hamilton  to  bring  up  the 
rear — perilous,  exacting,  desperate  responsibility— 
and  he  achieved  Washington's  perfect  confidence 

243 


(Sreatestf  American 

in  this  single  enterprise.  Could  anything  more 
spectacular  typify  the  military  genius  of  America 
than  such  a  feat  performed  with  such  endorsement 
—at  nineteen  years  of  age? 

At  White  Plains,  Hamilton's  little  battery  bore 
the  brunt  of  Howe's  attack  on  Chatterton's  Hill 
and  held  back  the  Hessians  for  deadly  hours.  If 
resourcefulness  in  face  of  peril  marks  the  martial 
master,  who  shall  deny  credentials  to  this  slender 
youth,  standing  his  smoking  cannon  on  end  and 
filling  them  with  musket  balls  when  his  round  shot 
were  exhausted? 

Down  through  New  Jersey  swung  the  hard- 
pressed  Continentals.  Still  it  was  Hamilton's 
decimated  troop  that  held  the  rear.  Liberty's 
spirit  was  trying  out  the  souls  of  men.  Finally 
came  that  historic  Christmas  immortalized  in 
picture  and  in  story — when  Washington  crossed 
the  ice-choked  Delaware,  surprised  Trenton  and 
won  the  first  great  battle  for  the  new  world's 
emancipation.  Hamilton  and  his  little  band,  re 
duced  from  91  to  25  men,  were  among  the  first 
chosen  for  this  desperate  adventure.  They  shared 
the  honor  of  a  glorious  triumph  even  as  they  con 
tributed  immeasurably  to  its  accomplishment. 
Quickly  came  another  victory  at  Princeton.  Again 

244 


ffmetican 

Hamilton  was  Washington's  reliance.  Again  he 
proved  his  sterling  military  worth.  And  not  yet 
had  the  sun  risen  on  his  twentieth  birthday  morn! 

General  Washington  now  drafted  Hamilton  for 
higher  works.  The  diversity  of  talents  which  he 
had  by  now  displayed,  leaving  doubtful  whether 
his  pen  or  his  sword  was  the  mightier,  recom 
mended  him  for  a  post  of  delicate  and  meridian  re 
sponsibility,  that  of  Aide  and  Military  Secretary 
to  the  Commander-in- Chief ,  with  rank  of  Lieuten 
ant-Colonel.  It  was  an  invitation  to  an  intimacy 
of  relations  with  Washington  and  to  an  implicity 
of  confidence  which  was  a  greater  decoration  than 
any  Government  could  give.  None  but  a  gallant 
soldier  of  dauntless  and  demonstrated  intrepidity 
could  thus  have  been  elevated  to  Washington's 
high  companionship  without  an  unhealthy  reflex 
in  the  jealousies  of  other  men.  Regardless  of 
Secretarial  capacities  and  literary  reputation, 
Washington  could  not  have  raised  Hamilton  to  the 
key-position  on  his  Staff,  except  as  he  had  im 
pressed  the  whole  Army  with  his  bravery  and 
genius.  That  the  invitation  was  ever  given,  and 
then  that  its  acceptance  met  with  universal  ac 
claim,  is  the  last  word  in  proof  of  Hamilton's 
battle-courage  and  standing  among  fighting  men. 

245 


American 


Hamilton  was  reluctant  to  leave  the  lines  where 
he  had  made  such  progress.  He  wanted  to  win  his 
way  to  high  command  in  active  contact  with  the 
foe.  He  knew  the  war  would  last  for  years  and  he 
was  confident  that  ere  final  victory  befell,  he  would 
ride  as  a  General  ;  and,  despite  his  youth,  which  was 
no  barrier  to  progress  and  precocity  in  other 
theaters  of  life,  who  shall  deny  that  there  was  every 
probability  of  exactly  such  event,  if  he  were  not 
killed  in  some  exploit  of  reckless  daring,  as  when  he 
volunteered  to  recover  Fort  Washington  by  storm? 
But  great  as  he  was  and  would  have  been  as  a  com 
bat  soldier,  he  contributed  vastly  more  to  the  suc 
cess  of  Revolutionary  arms  by  becoming  counsellor, 
confidant,  spokesman  and  first  friend  to  General 
Washington.  His  duties  were  varied,  but  always 
of  critical  importance.  He  assumed  complete  re 
sponsibility  for  all  of  Washington's  voluminous 
correspondence,  and  most  of  the  letters,  reports  and 
proclamations  which  issued  from  Washington's 
headquarters  and  which  testified  to  the  luminous 
intellect  of  Washington,  came  from  his  fertile 
brain.  "The  pen  of  our  Army,"  said  the  brave 
Troup,  "was  held  by  Hamilton;  and  for  dignity  of 
manner,  pith  of  matter,  and  elegance  of  style, 
General  Washington's  letters  are  unrivaled  in 

246 


(greatest  American 

military  annals."  This  observation  does  not  in 
tend  the  absurd  idolatry  which  would  take  all 
credit  from  the  Commander  and  transfer  it  to  his 
Aide.  This  is  not  a  Baconian-Shakespearian  con 
troversy.  But  neither  does  this  observation  in 
tend  that  the  Aide  shall  be  submerged  in  the 
adulation  due  his  Chief.  The  truth  is  that  credits 
must  divide.  Decisions  were  Washington's  pre 
rogative;  but  the  incisive,  unanswerable  logic  in 
which  they  were  clothed,  was  the  art  of  the  Scholar 
of  the  Revolution.  Furthermore,  no  one  can  know 
to  what  extent  "The  Little  Lion/'  as  Hamilton 
was  now  known  among  his  Army  friends,  partici 
pated  in  and  helped  to  shape  decisions.  But  one 
may  reasonably  believe  that  Washington's  later 
acknowledged  habit  of  depending  upon  Hamilton, 
almost  as  upon  an  oracle,  traced  its  roots  to  these 
days  when  battle  was  the  business  of  all  men. 

While  Washington  was  suffering  defeat  at 
Brandywine  and  Germantown,  Gates  was  vic 
torious  at  Saratoga  in  the  north.  A  desperate 
crisis  had  arrived.  Unless  Washington  received 
re-enforcements  from  Gates,  his  next  contact  with 
the  enemy  was  sure  to  be  his  last.  To  order  these 
re-enforcements,  by  exercise  of  sheer,  superior 
authority,  was  a  substantial  hazard  because  Gates, 

247 


(greatest  American 


vain,  weak  and  ambitious,  was  the  idol  of  the 
north  and  east,  thanks  to  the  happy  circumstance 
of  the  surrender  of  Burgoyne,  and  he  was  inevi 
tably  sure  to  be  resentful,  if  not  actually  defiant, 
toward  peremptory  draft  from  General  Head 
quarters.  The  delicacy  of  the  situation  was  sub 
sequently  demonstrated  by  the  famous  "  Con  way 
Cabal"  which  later  sought  actually  to  supersede 
Washington  with  Gates  in  supreme  American  com 
mand.  The  achievement  of  the  necessary  result, 
however,  was  imperative.  The  issue  of  war  hung 
upon  the  success  of  a  military  diplomat.  Hamil 
ton,  not  yet  of  age,  was  commissioned  to  the 
emergency.  How  well  he  performed  it  is  history. 
Without  once  disclosing  the  final  letter  of  command 
which  he  held  back  as  a  last  resort,  Hamilton, 
after  a  long,  hard  journey  overland,  met  Gates, 
beat  down  his  hostility  and  hesitation,  overcame 
barriers  of  pride  and  pique  and  even  of  intrigue, 
and  sent  Washington  more  men  than  the  great 
Commander  had  even  dared  to  ask.  The  un 
stinted  gratitude  which  this  supreme  soldier  show 
ered  upon  his  young  Aide's  head  may  well  be 
reflected  in  a  modern  veneration  all  too  little 
evidenced. 

Hamilton   was   at  Washington's   side   through 

248 


Qffje  Greatest  American 

the  unspeakable  griefs  and  sufferings  of  Valley 
Forge.  He  was  with  him  at  Monmouth  Court 
House  and  displayed  a  typical  impetuosity  of 
courage  in  checking  Lee's  disgraceful  retreat.  He 
was  with  him  in  each  of  the  tumbling  crises  which 
constantly  beset  the  Revolutionary  cause — always 
sustaining  hope,  aways  challenging  an  emulation 
of  his  faiths  and  works.  He  was  in  close  contact 
with  the  disclosure  of  Arnold's  treason  at  West 
Point.  He  was  in  the  heat  of  every  battle  in  which 
Washington  himself  engaged.  Through  it  all  he 
played  a  striking  role;  but  through  it  all  was  a  con 
stant  revulsion  against  the  fates  that  forced  him  to 
forego  combat  leadership  because  of  his  indispensa- 
bility  in  other  lines. 

"Almost  from  the  outset  Washington  consulted 
Hamilton  more  frequently  than  the  other  members 
of  his  staff  and  intrusted  the  most  weighty  affairs 
to  his  charge,"  the  great  historian,  Fiske,  has  writ 
ten.  *  "It  was  remarkable  that  this  preference, 
accorded  to  so  young  a  man,  should  have  excited 
no  jealousy.  But  the  'little  lion,'  as  the  older 
officers  called  him,  was  so  frank  and  so  good-na 
tured,  so  buoyant  and  so  brave,  and  so  free  from 
arrogance,  that  he  won  all  the  hearts.  There  was 

1  Essays,  Historical  and  Literary,  Vol.  I.,  by  John  Fiske. 

249 


(greatest  American 


a  mixture  in  him  of  Scottish  shrewdness  with 
French  vivacity,  that  most  people  found  irresist 
ible.  Knox  and  Laurens,  Lafayette  and  Steuben, 
loved  him  with  devoted  affection/' 

Then  came  1781.  On  February  16,  Hamilton 
resigned  his  staff-post  under  dramatic  circum 
stance.  Washington  had  sent  for  his  young  Aide. 
Delayed  two  minutes  by  Lafayette,  who  stopped 
him  on  the  stairs,  Hamilton  confronted  his  Com 
mander  in  one  of  those  towering  rages  which  were 
as  scathing  as  they  were  infrequent.  "Colonel 
Hamilton,"  Washington  exclaimed,  "you  have 
kept  me  waiting  these  ten  minutes.  I  must  tell 
you,  sir,  you  treat  me  with  disrespect."  It  was 
undue  petulance,  born  of  a  day's  hard  irritations, 
which  Washington  regretted  so  keenly  that  he 
vainly  endeavored  to  heal  the  breach  ere  morning 
came.  Yet  it  was  equally  undue  petulance,  born 
of  a  great  man's  knowledge  of  his  own  tender  fideli 
ties,  plus  a  subconscious  longing  for  release  from 
the  thraldom  of  subordinating  details,  which  flung 
back  Hamilton's  prompt  and  icily  courteous  reply: 
"I  am  not  conscious  of  it,  sir;  but  since  you  have 
thought  it,  we  part."  It  was  not  a  breach  of 
friendship  or  of  confidence  or  of  mutual  esteem. 
Each  understood  the  other.  It  was  but  the  inevi- 

250 


(greatest  American 

table  incident  that,  sooner  or  later,  was  bound  to 
interrupt  a  relationship  which  the  talents  and 
temper  of  Hamilton  had  out-grown.  It  was  but 
the  minor  breach  essential  to  a  new  and  ultimate 
liaison  which  should  bring  both  men  to  their 
maximum  utility. 

The  war  now  rapidly  sped  to  triumphant  climax. 
Hamilton  obtained  command  of  a  light  corps  and 
at  Yorktown,  in  October,  obtained  the  final,  peril 
ous  vantage  of  his  career  as  a  fighting  warrior.  He 
led  his  men,  with  dashing  impetuosity,  against 
the  first  British  redoubts  and  made  the  spectacular 
capture  which  set  the  pace  for  the  surrender  of 
Cornwallis  and  the  accomplished  independence  of 
the  confederated  colonies.  "Few  men,"  wrote 
Washington  of  this  final  exploit,  "have  exhibited 
greater  proofs  of  intrepidity,  coolness  and  firmness 
than  were  shown  on  this  occasion." J 

America's  necessities  now  called  Hamilton  from 
military  to  civil  responsibilities.  But,  as  a  matter 
of  analysis,  his  whole  career  was  a  tremendous 
series  of  battle-episodes,  each,  no  matter  what  its 
character,  demanding  that  same  soldierly  intrepid 
ity  which  sent  him  first  across  the  Yorktown 
trenches.  Whenever,  in  his  civil  life,  occasion  de- 

1  The  Life  of  Hamilton,  by  John  C.  Hamilton,  his  son. 

251 


&  reatetft  flmerican 


manded  army  action,  he  was  eager  actually  to  get 
back  into  his  uniform  and  lead  a  field  command. 
His  slight,  frail  body  bore  a  warrior's  heart.  His 
love  of  strategy  was  a  passion.  His  reverence  for 
law  and  orderly  society  was  so  real  that  it  involved 
an  equal  reverence  for  the  soldierly  forces  that 
made  law  and  order  stable.  His  courage  was  so 
pure  that  he  besought  no  risks  from  others  which 
he  was  not  eager  to  meet  himself.  Thus,  when 
anarchy  threatened  in  Western  Pennsylvania  and 
the  "Whiskey  Rebellion"  had  to  be  put  down  by 
force  of  arms,  Hamilton  petitioned  Washington 
for  the  active  command  of  these  1  5,000  troops.  He 
did  finally  go  to  the  rebellion  front  to  take  general 
control  of  the  operations,  which  brought  prompt 
and  bloodless  victory. 

But  the  crowning  compliment  to  Hamilton's 
soldierly  genius  and  dependability  came  in  1798 
when  French  aggressions  upon  American  honor  had 
driven  the  States  to  what  seemed  the  inevitable 
recourses  of  war.  With  that  confidence  in  Wash 
ington  which  was  a  colonial  tradition  and  a  subse 
quent  habit  to  the  hour  of  his  death,  the  nation 
turned  instinctively  to  its  first  magistrate,  who 
was  then  in  retirement  at  Mount  Vernon,  and, 
through  President  Adams,  begged  Washington 

252 


(greatest  American 

once  more  to  take  supreme  command.  He 
promptly  consented  upon  two  conditions;  first, 
that  no  service  should  be  required  of  him  until  the 
Army  was  actually  in  the  field;  second,  that  he 
should  be  permitted  to  ignore  seniority  grades,  as 
established  by  Revolutionary  service,  and  choose 
for  himself  the  officers  who  were  to  be  next  to  him 
in  rank,  and  form  his  staff.  Accordingly,  he  asked 
Adams  to  name  three  Major-Generals  in  the  fol 
lowing  order:  Hamilton,  Charles  Pinckney  and 
Knox.  General  Pinckney  magnanimously  and 
patriotically  recognized  the  propriety  of  Washing 
ton's  arrangement,  though  it  spelled  his  own  sub 
ordination.  "I  declare,"  he  wrote,  "that  it  was 
with  the  greatest  pleasure  I  saw  Hamilton's  name 
at  the  head  of  the  list  of  Major-Generals,  and  I  ap 
plauded  the  discernment  that  had  placed  him 
there.  I  knew  that  his  talents  in  war  were  great, 
that  he  had  a  genius  capable  of  forming  an  exten 
sive  military  plan,  and  a  spirit,  courageous  and 
enterprising,  equal  to  the  execution  of  it."1 

Washington's  obvious  intent  was  to  place  upon 
Hamilton  the  burden  of  first  responsibility  in  a  war 
which  promised  to  be  as  desperate  as  it  was  un 
fortunate.  How  pertinent  and  essential  he  deemed 

1  Life  of  Hamilton,  Vol.  II.,  by  John  T.  Morse,  Jr. 

253 


(Sreate^t  American. 

this  designation  was  soon  demonstrated  in  no  un 
certain  force.  Adams  was  Hamilton's  bitter,  per 
sonal  enemy,  for  reasons  that  were  factional  and 
bigoted.  When,  as  President,  the  hour  arrived  to 
issue  the  commissions,  as  asked  by  Washington 
and  sanctioned  by  the  Senate,  Adams  yielded  to 
his  pique  and  insisted  upon  naming  Knox  first, 
claiming  that  he  was  entitled  to  precedence  on  ac 
count  of  his  Revolutionary  seniority.  Furious 
controversy  immediately  broke  about  the  White 
House  and  the  Cabinet  and  surged  about  the  stub 
born,  but  sturdy,  old  patriot  in  the  executive  chair. 
It  was  not  until  Washington  notified  Adams 
that  he  himself  would  resign  if  Hamilton  was  not 
given  responsible  priority,  that  Adams  grudgingly 
yielded. 

No  incident  could  be  more  important  than  this 
in  estimating  Hamilton's  martial  values — not  ex 
cepting  even  the  eloquent  fact  that,  back  in  active 
Revolutionary  days,  the  great  Lafayette  had  urged 
the  designation  of  Hamilton  as  Adjutant-General. 
Washington  was  a  statesman  whose  implacable 
integrity  of  purpose  put  his  country's  welfare  above 
all  and  every  other  consideration.  He  never  was 
known  to  take  counsel  of  personal  or  partisan  preju 
dice  in  any  decision  he  was  ever  known  to  make. 

254 


(greatest  American 

Further,  he,  above  all  other  men,  was  in  position 
to  know  not  only  the  true  relative  abilities  of  the 
leaders  of  his  time,  but  also  the  seriousness  of  this 
critical  war  emergency  which  now  called  for  the 
country's  best,  if  the  fruits  of  his  own  heroic  service 
for  the  new  Republic  were  to  be  saved  from  threat 
ening  disaster  and  preserved.  That  Washington, 
in  all  these  conditions  and  circumstances,  should 
have  deemed  Hamilton's  elevation  to  supreme 
Army  authority  second  only  to  himself,  so  vital 
that  he  threatened  to  sheathe  his  own  sword  if  any 
thing  interfered  with  such  a  program,  is  the  great 
est  compliment  ever  paid  by  one  soldier  to  another. 
To  have  won  such  a  confidence  from  Washington 
and  to  have  deserved  martial  responsibilities  which 
included  even  Washington's  destiny  in  their  pos 
sible  scope,  marks  Hamilton  for  all  time  as  one  of 
the  greatest  soldiers  who  ever  followed  the  Ameri 
can  flag  or  stepped  to  the  music  of  unconquered 
and  unconquerable  American  Union. 

Hamilton  flung  himself  with  habitual  energy 
into  the  task  of  preparing  the  new-fledged  Republic 
for  another  war.  Washington  had  stipulated  that 
he  be  not  called  upon  until  the  forward  march  was 
ready  to  proceed.  This  left  the  heavy  responsibil 
ity  of  all  preliminaries  upon  Hamilton's  shoulders. 

255 


(Sreatetft  American 

But,  as  always,  he  was  equal  to  the  task  and  test. 
He  first  drafted  and  executed  plans  for  the  fortifica 
tion  of  the  harbor  of  New  York.  He  made  a  com 
plete  program,  which  Washington  approved,  for 
recruiting  men,  for  apportioning  them  and  their 
officers  to  the  various  states,  for  supplies,  arsenals, 
camp  equipages  and  ordnance,  for  army  organiza 
tion,  pay,  uniforms,  rations,  rank,  promotions, 
arms,  fuel,  and  for  the  general  regulation  of  bar 
racks,  garrisons  and  camps.  With  an  avidity  for 
detail  equaled  only  by  his  mastery  of  the  subjects 
attacked  in  swift  and  encyclopedic  succession,  he 
planned  effective  warfare  for  every  arm  of  service, 
including  medical,  and  secured  all  necessary  sanc 
tion  from  Congress  and  from  the  Department  of 
War.  Indeed,  so  completely  did  the  Government 
look  to  him  for  constructive  leadership,  that  his 
advice  was  sought  and  acted  upon  with  no  less 
enthusiasm  in  the  Navy  Department  and  in  the 
Treasury.  Nothing  escaped  his  capacious  scrutiny. 
His  plan  of  campaign  was  developed  on  a  scale  so 
extensive  that  it  even  comprehended  the  acquisi 
tion  of  adjacent,  continental  areas,  then  under 
foreign  dominion,  but  destined  ultimately  to  be 
come  a  part  of  the  United  States.  Though  a  sol 
dier,  he  was  always  the  statesman.  Though  a 

256 


(greatest  American 

statesman,  he  was  always  the  soldier.  He  made 
every  necessary  arrangement  for  the  invasion  of 
Louisiana  and  the  Floridas.  Only  a  year  before 
he  had  urged  upon  Secretary  of  State  Pickering  the 
importance  of  American  expansion  in  these  direc 
tions.  He  had  always  been  an  ardent  advocate 
of  the  natural  growth  of  the  States  territorially. 
Indeed,  the  last  resolution  he  had  introduced  in  the 
old  Confederation  Congress  had  declared  the 
"navigation  of  the  Mississippi  to  be  a  clear  and 
essential  right"  belonging  to  the  new  world  gov 
ernment.  What  he  had  failed  to  acquire  by  state 
craft,  he  now  proposed  to  get  by  war,  not  only  by 
way  of  ultimate  compensation  for  another  martial 
investment  on  his  country's  part,  not  only  because 
he  realized  that  the  surest,  easiest  way  for  America 
to  battle  France  was  through  her  subservient 
Spanish  ally  which  was  sovereign  over  these  con 
tiguous  lands,  but  fundamentally  because  he  saw, 
more  clearly  than  any  of  his  contemporaries,  what 
destiny  had  in  store  in  these  respects  for  the  Re 
public.  His  vision  was  imperial  in  its  aspirations 
for  the  widest  possible  expansion  of  the  areas  that 
should  be  the  home  and  the  citadel  of  the  new  de 
mocracy.  He  even  undertook  discreet  negotiations 

with  the  Spanish  adventurer,  Miranda,  who  sought 

17  257 


(greatest  American 


a  coalition  that  should  liberate  Central  and  South 
America  from  Europe's  sovereignty.  No  possible 
exigency  escaped  his  restless  imagination  and  tire 
less  zeal.  No  defensive  war  program  —  and  it  was 
all  defensive  —  was  more  ambitiously  complete.  Up 
to  the  last  possible  moment  of  negotiations  he  had 
counseled  peace  with  France,  just  as  he  had  pre 
viously  done  with  England.  He  had  a  great 
warrior's  abhorrence  of  war.  He  had  left  no  effort 
unmade  to  compose  amity.  But  when  once  breach 
came,  like  every  great  soldier,  he  proposed  to  take 
maximum  advantage  of  whatever  advantages  war 
might  afford;  and  in  his  prospective  strategy  was 
drawn  the  first  map  of  an  expanded,  continental 
United  States  which  grew  in  unfolding  history  as 
it  had  grown  in  his  own  luminous  intellect. 

The  sudden  and  unexpected  composition  of 
peace  suspended  the  necessity  for  testing  Hamil 
ton's  final  abilities  to  execute  the  campaigns  he  had 
so  brilliantly  planned.  But  had  a  war  with  France 
actually  occurred,  no  candid  commentator  can 
doubt  that  Hamilton  would  have  distinguished 
himself  as  spectacularly  in  performance  as  he  had 
in  preparing  his  country  for  the  hour  of  judgment. 

The  chief,  immediate  result  of  his  work  was 
the  establishment  of  the  United  States  Military 

258 


(greatest  American 

Academy  at  West  Point — a  foundation  stone  in 
American  military  policy  upon  which  the  nation  is 
still  proud  to  lean.  In  The  Conqueror,  Gertrude 
Atherton  quotes  a  letter  from  West  Point's  libra 
rian  as  follows:  "The  best  praise  that  can  be  given 
him  is  that  he  thoroughly  understood  the  basic 
principles  underlying  military  affairs,  and  that 
with  superb  genius  he  applied  them  to  the  exi 
gencies  of  his  time  with  that  philosophical  and  at 
the  same  time  practical  talent  which  was  his  special 
endowment/' 

Hamilton  was  appointed  Major-General  and 
Inspector-General  of  the  United  States  Army, 
July  1 8,  1798,  first  ranking  officer  under  Washing 
ton  as  Lieutenant-General .  He  was  honorably 
discharged  as  such  on  June  15,  1800.  "It  is  a 
reasonable  inference,"  said  ex-Secretary  of  War 
Baker  on  December  7,  1920,  "that  he  was  the 
ranking  officer  in  the  Army  from  the  death  of 
General  Washington,  December  14,  1799,  until  his, 
Hamilton's,  discharge;  but  he  was  not  what  is 
sometimes  technically  known  as  Commander-in- 
Chief." 


259 


$ropfjetic 

IN  a  dissective  analysis  such  as  this  study  of 
Hamilton's  life  has  been,  there  are  necessarily 
many  biographical  events  that  have  failed  to  find 
a  place  under  any  of  the  various  general  subject- 
headings  which  mobilize  the  entries  upon  Hamil 
ton's  service  record.  To  some  extent  the  more 
intimate  humanities,  the  more  intimate  disclosures 
of  personality,  have  had  to  be  subordinated  to  the 
broader  sweeps  of  history.  We  have  been  contem 
plating  Hamilton  and  History  in  joint  perspective. 
But  to  conclude  the  picture  adequately,  the  kalei 
doscope  must  fling  a  rushing  series  of  progressive 
snap-shots  upon  the  screen.  These  spot-glimpses 
reveal  the  man  himself.  They  are  specimens  from 
the  laboratory  of  his  life.  While  in  no  sense  do 
they  pretend  to  complete  a  detailed  biography, 
yet  they  do  complete  the  exhibits  necessary  to  a 

rounded  vision  of  the  man  and  his  vast  resource. 
§ 

Contemplate  him,  just  turned  a  college  sopho 
more,  attending  the  portentous  "Meeting  in  The 

260 


Sfoterkan 

Fields"1  in  July,  1774,  to  voice  New  York's  de 
mand  for  participation  in  the  first  Continental 
Congress.  Great  patriot  orators  were  there,  pre 
pared  for  the  momentous  occasion.  The  best  and 
most  carefully  selected  talent  colonial  New  York 
could  boast  was  on  the  program.  Every  phase  of 
outraged  America's  complaint  and  aspiration  was 
poured  out  upon  the  restless,  earnest  throng.  But 
none  of  the  pleadings  answered  to  young  Hamil 
ton's  exalted  measure  of  the  sublimity  of  the  occa 
sion.  None  of  the  fervid  exhortations  answered 
the  longings  in  his  soul.  With  each  succeeding 
interval,  he  edged  nearer  to  the  stage.  Destiny, 
working  in  his  youthful  blood,  was  pulling,  pulling, 
pulling.  Finally  he  sprang  to  the  rude  tribune,  an 
unbidden  advocate,  a  mere  stripling  of  a  boy,  but, 
withal,  a  God-blessed  apostle  of  liberty  with  a 
God-inspired  message  upon  his  unleashed  tongue. 
It  was  his  maiden  speech,  delivered  under  auspices 
that  might  well  have  caused  a  veteran  to  halt. 
He  faltered,  trembled,  like  a  ship  bracing  to 
the  storm.  The  startled  crowds  stood  silent  in 
amazement.  Quickly  genius  mastered  fright.  The 
lightning  leaped  from  his  lips.  A  great  cause 
had  found  its  oracle.  He  swayed  the  throng  as  had 
1  The  old  name  for  City  Hall  Park. 

261: 


(greatest  American 


none  of  the  high  patriots  who  had  preceded.  He 
dominated  the  crowd  and  the  occasion.  One  can 
imagine  the  tense,  throbbing  inspiration  of  the 
climax.  "It  is  war!*'  he  cried.  "It  is  war!  It  is 
the  battlefield  or  slavery!"  The  first  note  of  the 
American  Revolution  had  been  sounded  —  by  a  boy 
of  seventeen  !  First  reveille  had  called  America  to 
arms!  Where  is  there  a  parallel  for  this  dramatic 
epic?  Patrick  Henry,  with  his  immortal  "Give 
me  liberty  or  give  me  death  !  "  had  yet  to  paraphrase 
Hamilton's  startling  and  courageous  challenge. 
Benjamin  Franklin,  persuasive  representative  of 
the  Colonies  in  England,  was  saying  to  Pitt:  "I 
never  heard  from  any  person  the  least  expression 
of  a  wish  for  separation."  Washington  was  writ 
ing  to  a  friend:  "No  such  thing  as  independence  is 
desired  by  any  thinking  man  in  America."  1  Lex 
ington  and  Concord  and  Bunker  Hill  still  had 
nearly  a  year  to  wait.  It  remained  for  Hamilton 
to  sound  the  tocsin.  He  was  first  torch-bearer  to 
the  new  crusades.  A  boy  of  seventeen!  Two 
years  before,  an  immigrant! 

Contemplate  him,  one  year  later,  wearing  his 
country's    uniform,  burning   with    passions   that 

1  Beard  and  Bagley's  History  of  the  American  People. 

262 


(Sreatestf  American 


are  born  only  in  the  tropics'  blood,  committed  to 
the  Revolution  with  an  abandon  that  brooked  no 
compromise,  yet  daring  to  stand  upon  the  steps  of 
Dr.  Cooper's  house  and  arguing  back  an  angry  mob 
of  maddened  patriots  intent  upon  wreaking  venge 
ance  on  a  suspected  Tory  scholar!  Similarly  he 
saved  one  Thurman's,  life  when  "Travis*  Mob" 
was  bent  on  summary  discipline.  Similarly  he 
sought  to  capture  vigilantes  who  carried  off  the 
types  of  Rivington,  the  Tory  printer.  In  all  these 
tinder-instances,  he  risked  his  popularity,  his  influ 
ence,  his  life,  for  his  sense  of  fair-play,  his  love  of 
order,  and  his  keen  and  constant  perceptions  that 
always  distinguished  between  liberty  and  license. 
Such  was  the  youth.  Where  is  his  parallel?  Small 
wonder  that  maturing  years  made  him  his  country's 
master  man! 


Contemplate  him  at  twenty-three,  face  to  face 
with  the  wicked  treachery  of  Benedict  Arnold. 
Toward  the  traitor  to  his  country,  Hamilton  was 
black  with  bitterness.  But  for  young  Andre,  Brit 
ish  spy,  who  was  serving  another  cause  with  the 
same  blind  fidelity  with  which  Hamilton  under 
similar  circumstances  would  have  cheerfully  served 

263 


(greatest  American 

his  own,  he  conceived  a  poignant  fancy.  His 
heart  and  sympathies  were  touched — as  in  not  un- 
similar  occasions,  Lincoln's  were  in  later  years. 
An  exchange  of  Arnold  for  Andre  would  have 
served  alike  his  loves  and  hates,  and  to  this  end  he 
dedicated  his  solicitude.  But  the  rigid  mandates 
of  military  policy  were  impervious.  At  last,  in 
final  desperation,  he  asked  that  Andre  be  shot 
instead  of  hanged — the  death  of  a  soldier,  not  a 
criminal.  But  Washington  could  not  relent.  In 
some  exigencies,  mercy  turns  to  flint.  In  letters 
to  Miss  Betsy  Schuyler,  his  future  wife,  Hamilton 
described  all  these  unhappy  scenes  with  a  pathos 
and  a  grief  that  hold  a  mirror  to  his  soul  and  show 
him  as  chivalrous  as  he  was  brave,  as  human  as  he 
was  sublime. 


Contemplate  him  at  twenty-five,  a  pivotal  mem 
ber  of  the  Continental  Congress  at  the  minimum 
age  for  congressional  service  permitted  under  the 
Constitution  as  it  stands  to-day,  hot  with  indigna 
tion  that  the  shoddy  government,  punctilious  in 
drawing  its  own  pay,  should  propose  to  dismiss  the 
Continental  Army  without  a  pretense  of  settling 
its  long  arrears.  He  lashed  this  ingratitude  with 

264 


(greatest  American 

all  the  vehemence  of  which  his  facile  tongue  and 
pen  were  capable.  He  made  the  cause  of  the 
humblest  soldier  in  the  ranks  his  personal  con 
cern.  He  had  fought  with  them.  He  knew 
their  sufferings  and  their  griefs  and  woes.  He 
acknowledged  them  to  be  the  saviours  of  their 
land.  He  burned  with  anger  at  the  suggestion  of 
the  government's  tacit  repudiation  of  such  a 
solemn  debt.  In  committee  and  on  the  floor  of 
Congress  he  fought  for  these  heroes  of  66  battles 
for  the  nation's  independence.  He  was  Chairman 
of  the  Committee  on  Military  Affairs.  He  re 
ported  a  measure  providing  full  payment  for  life 
to  all  seriously  disabled  officers,  and  for  the  es 
tablishment  of  a  hospital  and  home  for  all  the 
non-commissioned  officers  and  private  soldiers, 
who  were  proper  inmates  for  it,  there  to  be  sup 
ported  for  life,  and  providing  them  also  with  cloth 
ing.  To  achieve  these  ends,  he  introduced  a  reso 
lution  proposing  an  additional  loan  of  three  mil 
lion  livres  from  France,  pending  reimbursement 
of  the  national  Treasury  by  the  States.  This  reso 
lution  asserted  that  Congress  "confidently  relies, 
for  an  immediate  and  efficacious  attention  to  the 
present  requisition,  upon  the  disposition  of  their 
constituents,  not  only  to  do  justice  to  those  brave 

265 


(greatest  Smertcan 

men  who  have  suffered  and  sacrificed  so  much  for 
their  country  and  whose  distress  must  be  extreme, 
should  they  be  sent  from  the  field  without  the  pay 
ment  of  a  part  of  their  well-earned  dues,  but  also 
to  enable  Congress  to  maintain  the  faith  and  repu 
tation  of  the  United  States,  both  of  which  are 
seriously  concerned  in  relieving  the  necessities  of  a 
meritorious  army  and  fulfilling  the  public  stipula 
tions.  "  He  proposed  and  secured  legislation  pro 
viding  land  grants  to  these  veterans.  He  left  no 
stone  unturned  to  defend  the  rights  of  his  former 
compatriots  in  arms.  Never  was  ',he  doctrine  of 
"a  compelling  moral  obligation,"  as  preached  so 
earnestly  in  another  connection  by  President 
Wilson  twelve  decades  later,  more  strenuously 
advanced.  Indeed,  so  pointed  was  Hamilton's 
uncomprising  leadership  in  these  respects  that  he 
was  wrongly  suspected  of  writing  the  "Newburgh 
Address,"  proposing  that  the  Army  enforce  its  own 
claims  with  its  bayonets.  He  was  the  original 
prophet  of  that  "square  deal"  which  another  fear 
less  friend  of  justice  immortalized  in  a  later  cen 
tury.  He  was  the  first  and  main  reliance  of  every 
Revolutionary  soldier  with  an  unfulfilled  debt 
against  the  government  which  Revolutionary  sacri 
fice  and  service  had  brought  through  the  martial 

266 


(greatest  American 

storms.  Such  were  the  human  and  humane  in 
stincts  that  paralleled  abstract  constructive 
statesmanship  and  genius  in  this  rare  man. 


Contemplate  him  at  thirty,  the  minimum  age 
at  which  our  present  Constitution  consents  that 
youth  acquires  matured  law-making  eligibility  for 
higher  legislative  service  in  the  higher  congressional 
branch.  Contemplate  him,  proceeding  to  the  New 
York  Assembly  where  he  not  only  took  upon  him 
self  the  leadership  against  Governor  Clinton's 
opposition  to  national  revenues  contributed  by  the 
States,  but  where  also  he  displayed  such  a  versatil 
ity  of  constructive  genius  in  such  an  infinity  of 
pertinent  directions,  that  his  youth,  in  years,  seems 
swallowed  up  in  the  character  of  patriarch.  Says 
Morse:1 

"He  labored  hard  to  prevent  legislation  in  con 
travention  of  the  Treaty  of  Peace;  he  corrected 
gross  theoretical  blunders  in  a  proposed  system  of 
regulating  elections,  and  strove  hard,  though  not 
altogether  successfully,  to  eliminate  religious  re 
strictions;  he  succeeded  in  preventing  the  dis- 
franchisement  of  a  great  number  of  persons  for 

1  Life  of  Hamilton,  by  John  T.  Morse,  Jr. 

267 


having  been  interested,  often  unwillingly,  in  priva 
teering  ventures;  he  stayed  some  absurd  laws 
proposed  concerning  the  proposed  qualifications  of 
candidates  for  office;  in  the  matter  of  taxation,  he 
substituted  for  the  old  method  of  an  arbitrary, 
official  assessment,  with  all  its  gross  risks  of  error 
and  partiality,  the  principle  of  allowing  the  in 
dividual  to  return  under  oath  his  taxable  property; 
he  labored  to  promote  public  education  by  statu 
tory  regulation;  his  'first  great  object  was  to  place 
a  book  in  the  hand  of  every  American  child/  and 
he  evolved  a  system  which  served  as  the  model  of 
that  promulgated  in  France  by  the  imperial  decree 
of  1808;  he  had  much  to  do  with  the  legislation 
concerning  the  relations  of  debtor  and  creditor, 
then  threatening  to  dissever  the  whole  frame  of 
society;  he  was  obliged  to  give  no  little  attention 
to  the  department  of  criminal  law ;  finally,  he  had 
to  play  a  chief  part  in  settling  the  long  and  perilous 
struggle  concerning  the  'New  Hampshire  Grants,' 
the  region  now  constituting  the  State  of  Vermont ; 
his  efforts  in  this  matter  chiefly  averted  war  and 
brought  the  first  new  State  into  the  Union."  In 
cidentally,  he  proposed  an  institution  for  public 
instruction  under  the  form  and  title  of  a  University, 
to  be  known  as  the  "University  of  the  State  New 

268 


American 


York"  ;  and,  to  his  energy  and  enlightened  patriot 
ism  New  York  City  is  indebted  for  the  stately 
presence  and  benignant  influence  of  her  noble 
University  and  for  the  establishment  of  several  of 
the  most  useful  Academies  which  now  exist 
throughout  the  State.  x 

With  all  the  respect  due  to  modern  State  legisla 
tures  and  the  faithful  citizens  who  sit  in  them,  it 
is  little  short  of  impossible  for  us,  of  modern  days, 
to  imagine  such  a  scintillating,  encyclopedic  genius 
in  these  fields  of  responsibility,  as  this  trite  para 
graph  describes.  It  is  a  picture  of  his  versatility 
and  power.  It  is  a  typical  chapter  in  his  roll  of 
achievement.  Whether  functioning  in  big  or  little 
responsibilities,  whether  in  State  or  Nation, 
whether  in  Capitol  or  Cabinet,  he  was  always  so 
astoundingly  superior  to  his  contemporaries  or  suc 
cessors,  down  to  the  present  hour,  that  the  record, 
upon  occasion,  sounds  more  like  legend  than  like 
fact.  This  paragraph  describing  him  at  thirty,  an 
apostrophe  to  the  greatest  State  legislator,  is  but 
an  average  cross-section  of  his  whole  public  life. 
There  was  apparently  nothing  which  he  could  not 
and  did  not  do  superlatively  well.  We  think  we 

1  Life  and  Times  of  Alexander  Hamilton,  by  Samuel  M. 
Schmucker,  1856. 

269 


(greatest  American 

have  modern  legislative  problems  of  terrific,  driv 
ing  pressure  and  baffling  complexity — and,  of 
course,  we  have.  Yet  they  are  transparent  sim 
plicity  compared  with  the  uncharted  enigma  which 
the  Republic's  founders  had  to  confront.  But 
suppose  some  modern  statesman  should  arise,  in 
State  or  National  forum,  and  effectively  demon 
strate  to  us  that  he  has  a  ready,  perfected,  practical 
plan  for  each  of  our  modern  emergencies;  and  sup 
pose  we  learned  to  lean  upon  his  wisdom,  subcon 
sciously  expecting  it  to  function  always  to  our 
salvation  and  advantage,  as  was  the  case  with 
Hamilton  in  these  early  days.  If  you  can  imagine 
such  a  Titan  in  this  modern  time,  do  you  doubt 
what  would  be  his  destiny?  Why  did  so  many 
Americans  turn  to  Herbert  Hoover  with  an  elo 
quent  demonstration  of  modern  trust  and  confi 
dence?  Was  it — is  it — not  because  he  proved  his 
capacity  in  crisis?  Suppose  some  statesman  stood 
in  relation  to  all  our  problems  as  Hoover  did  in 
relation  to  one  or  two.  Would  there  be  much 
doubt  as  to  his  rating  or  his  ultimate  goal?  Yet 
all  this  describes,  without  exaggeration,  what 
Hamilton  meant  to  his  incubative  age.  The  vast 
gamut  of  subjects  which  found  him  their  master  in 
this  State  legislative  career  to  which  this  paragraph 

270 


(greatest  American 

particularly  refers,  later  became  widely  expanded 
and  enlarged  as  his  field  of  responsibility  broadened. 
But  even  with  the  spotlight  concentrated  upon 
this  single  contemplation,  when  Hamilton  was  only 
thirty  years  of  age,  can  our  history  provide  a 
parallel  for  breadth  of  vision,  wealth  of  mentality, 
and  depth  of  human  understanding  in  such  a 
variety  of  ways? 

An  interesting  personal  picture  of  Hamilton,  at 
about  this  time,  is  afforded  in  an  old  book  by 
Rufus  Wilmot  Griswold1  (the  author  claims,  in  a 
pre-word,  to  have  lived  close  to  his  subject  and  to 
have  presented  "a  most  exact  adherence  to  truth" 
in  "even  the  most  trivial  details  of  narrative,  de 
lineation  and  suggestion, ' '  all  of  which  are '  'warrant 
ed  by  unquestionable  authorities").  The  picture 
is  of  Hamilton  among  his  confreres. 

"That  is  he,  with  such  a  remarkably  expressive 
face.  His  age  is  about  30.  You  observe  that  he 
is  one  of  the  smallest  men  here:  indeed,  under  the 
middle  size,  and  thin  in  person,  but  remarkably 
erect  and  dignified.  His  hair  is  turned  back  from 
his  forehead,  powdered,  and  collected  in  a  club 
behind.  Mark  the  fairness  of  his  complexion  and 

1  American  Society  in  the  Days  of  Washington,  by 
Griswold. 

271 


(greatest  American 

his  rosy  cheeks.  Watch  the  play  of  his  singularly 
expressive  countenance:  in  repose,  it  seems  grave 
and  thoughtful;  but  see  him  when  spoken  to,  and 
instantly  all  is  lighted  up  with  intelligent  vivacity, 
and  around  his  lips  plays  a  smile  of  extraordinary 
sweetness.  It  is  impossible  to  look  at  his  features 
and  not  see  that  they  are  ineffaceably  stamped  by 
the  divine  hand  with  the  impress  of  genius.  His  is 
indeed  a  mind  of  immense  grasp,  and  unlimited 
original  resources.  Whether  he  speaks  or  writes, 
he  is  equally  great.  He  can  probably  endure  more 
unremitted  and  intense  mental  labor  than  any  man 
in  this  body.  So  rapid  are  his  perceptions,  and  at  the 
time  so  clear,  that  he  seems  sometimes  to  reach  his 
conclusions  by  a  species  of  intuition.  He  possesses 
in  a  wonderful  degree  that  most  unfailing  mark  of 
the  highest  order  of  intellect,  the  comprehensive 
ness  of  view  which  leads  to  accurate  generalization. 
He  catches  the  principle  involved  in  a  discussion, 
as  if  by  instinct,  and  adheres  rigidly  to  that,  quite 
sure  that  thereby  the  details  are  certain  to  be 
right.  Another  mark  of  eminent  genius  is  continu 
ally  exhibiting  itself  in  the  striking  originality  of 
his  views.  There  is  nothing  commonplace  about 
his  mind.  Among  great  men  anywhere,  Alexander 
Hamilton  would  be  felt  to  be  great.  As  an  in- 

272 


(greatest  American 

dividual,  he  is  a  frank,  amiable  and  high-minded 
gentleman." 


Contemplate  him  at  thirty-one,  leading  a  for 
lorn  hope  in  the  New  York  Constitutional  Con 
vention  at  Poughkeepsie,  the  indomitable  cham 
pion  of  Union  and  federalization,  never  acknowl 
edging  defeat,  facing  a  hostile  majority  through 
six  guerilla  weeks  which  would  have  broken  down 
a  genius  less  sturdily  endowed  with  the  power  of 
personality  and  the  authority  of  right!  On  that 
final  day  of  the  supreme  test,  he  spoke  through 
many  solemn  hours  with  such  a  challenge  to  his 
adversaries  and  his  time  as  could  have  been  sus 
tained  by  few  advocates  in  the  story  of  the  world. 
An  orator  must  have  within  his  own  breast  all  the 
bottomless  well-springs  of  human  sympathy  in 
order  to  touch  others  with  miracle-words  as  did 
young  Hamilton  that  fateful  July  day.  He  must 
know  the  human  emotions,  with  confident  mastery, 
to  play  the  scale  as  did  Hamilton  in  that  last  ap 
peal.  To  few  men  is  it  given  to  face  such  a  situa 
tion;  and  to  few  men  is  it  permitted  thus  to  rend 
the  rocks  of  opposition  by  the  silver  and  the  steel  of 
human  words.  To  read  the  story  is  to  read  a 
18  273 


Cfjc  <©reate£t  American 

legend.  To  sense  the  hazardous  situation  which 
he  faced  and  overcame,  to  guage  the  odds,  try  to 
imagine  some  modern  Senator,  in  the  Upper  House 
of  Congress  in  the  long  sessions  of  1920  during 
which  the  Treaty  of  Versailles  was  submitted  to 
debate;  try  to  imagine  a  Senator  with  the  power, 
by  sheer  weight  of  oratorical  appeal,  who  could 
have  won  President  Wilson's  "last  guard"  away 
from  its  "League  of  Nations"  fealties,  or,  on  the 
other  hand,  who  could  have  compelled  the  "irre- 
concilables"  to  yield  to  the  Wilsonian  program! 
Where  in  the  whole  story  of  America  is  there  proof 
that  any  citizen,  save  Hamilton,  was  or  is  an 
orator  of  such  resultful  power? 

Chancellor  Kent,  then  a  young  lawyer,  was  a  spec 
tator  in  this  convention.  Of  Hamilton's  miracu 
lous  achievement  in  turning  a  close-knit  majority 
opposition,  foresworn  to  everlasting  Constitu 
tional  hostility,  into  a  majority  favorable  to  the 
new  adventure,  Kent  has  said: 

"The  over-powering  eloquence  of  Colonel  Hamil- 
^  ton  was  exerted  to  its  utmost  pitch,  and  shook  the 

most  resolved  of  the  majority.  He  maintained 
the  ascendancy  on  every  question.  He  was  in 
disputably  pre-eminent.  He  spoke  with  great 
earnestness  and  energy,  and  with  considerable  and 

274  y 

A 


(greatest  American 


sometimes  vehement  gesture.  His  language  was 
clear,  nervous  and  classical,  his  investigations 
penetrated  to  the  foundation  and  reason  of  every 
doctrine  and  principle  which  he  examined;  and  he 
brought  to  the  debate  a  mind  richly  adorned  with 
all  the  learning  and  precedents  requisite  for  the 
occasion.  He_jie^ex^mitte.d  to._jm£el^.exajnine 
and  discover  the  strength  or  weakness,  the  truth 
or  falsehood,  of  every  proposition  which  he  had  to 
contend  with.  His  candor  was  magnanimous,  and 
rose  to  a  level  with  his  abilities.  His  temper  was 
spirited,  but  courteous,  amiable  and  generous  ;  and 
he  frequently  made  powerful  and  pathetic  appeals 
to  the  moral  sense  and  patriotism,  to  the  fears  and 
hopes^bf  ^fhe~assembly;  and  painted  vividly  the 
difficulties  and  dangers  of  the  crisis.  His  .  .  . 
speeches  .  .  .  were  regarded  at  the  time,  by  the 
best  judges,  as  the  noblest  specimens  which  the 
debates  in  that,  or  any  other,  assembly  ever 
afforded  of  the  talents  and  wisdom  of  the  states 


man." 


Discussing  oratory  in  one  of  his  ancient  letters, 
Pliny  has  said:  "He  who  is  possessed  of  the  true 
spirit  of  oratory,  should  be  bold  and  elevated,  and 
sometime  even  flame  out,  be  hurried  away,  and 
frequently  tread  upon  the  brink  of  a  precipice;  for 

275 


<@reate£t  American 

danger  is  generally  near  whatever  is  towering  and 
exalted.  The  plain,  it  is  true,  affords  a  safer,  but 
for  that  reason  a  more  humble  and  inglorious, 
path;  they  who  run  are  more  likely  to  stumble  than 
they  who  creep;  but  the  latter  gain  no  honor  by 
not  slipping,  while  the  former  even  fall  with  glory. 
It  is  with  eloquence  as  with  some  other  arts;  she 
is  never  more  pleasing  than  when  she  risks  most." 
If  any  orator  ever  dared  the  precipical  brinks,  run 
ning  fearlessly  while  others  crept,  and  risking 
victory  against  any  odds,  no  matter  what  the 
menace  in  disparity,  Hamilton  matched  the  maxi 
mum  of  Pliny's  measure,  and  neither  slipped  nor 
fell. 


Contemplate  him,  again,  at  thirty-two,  called  to 
the  key -position  in  the  first  Cabinet  01  Washington, 
and  welcomed  by  the  first  Congress  under  the 
Constitution  as  the  trusted  counselor  to  whom  any 
branch  of  Government  could  turn,  as  to  an  oracle, 
for  the  correct  answer  to  any  problem  among  a 
multitude  diversified.  The  mere  chronology  is 
startling.  A  Minister  of  Government  at  thirty-  V 
two!  Our  modern  standards  would  be  shocked  at 
the  mere  suggestion  of  the  induction  of  such  youth 

276 


amencau 


into  high  Cabinet  responsibility.  We  would  shake 
our  heads  and  doubt.  For  purposes  of  this  com 
parison,  consider  the  last  Cabinet  of  President 
Wilson  in  these  respects  —  and  his  Cabinet  was  but 
typical  of  practically  all  official  families  since  the 
memory  of  man  runneth  not  to  the  contrary: 
Secretary  of  State  Colby,  51  when  he  entered  his 
portfolio;  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  Houston,  55, 
as  this  data  is  compiled;  Secretary  of  War  Baker, 
at  the  half  century  mark;  Secretary  of  the  Navy 
Daniels,  59;  Secretary  of  Labor  Wilson,  also  59; 
Attorney-General  Palmer,  49;  Secretary  of  Com 
merce  Alexander,  69;  Postmaster-General  Burle- 
son,  58  ;  Secretary  of  Agriculture  Meredith,  45.  As 
a  matter  of  fact,  these  exhibits  are  undoubtedly 
below  the  average,  very  considerably,  of  the  past 
fifty  years.  In  the  light  of  this  modern  habit  and 
experience,  though  making  all  allowances  for  the 
fact  that  a  young  Government  naturally  leaned  on 
younger  men  than  would  be  the  case  when  ma- 
turer  years  have  permitted  greater  seasoning  of 
wisdom,  is  it  not  astounding  that  the  most  impor 
tant  member  of  Washington's  first  Cabinet  should 
have  been  a  man  of  but  32  ;  and,  more  astounding 
still,  that  he  should  have  been  the  dominating 
influence  of  the  entire  Administration? 

277 


Tm 


(greatest  American 


Not  only  did  he  chart  the  basis  for  restored 
federal  credit  in  all  its  ramifications,  but  also,  in 
quick,  flashing  succession,  he  planned  the  revenue 
cutter  service,  recommended  navigation  laws, 
drafted  the  first  bill  for  a  postal  system,  laid  the 
foundations  for  the  purchase  and  establishment  of 
West  Point,  proposed  the  means  for  handling 
public  lands,  established  the  mint,  advised  the 
decimal  system  for  our  money,  with  the  dollar 
as  the  unit,  recommended  the  structure  of  success 
fully  encouraged  commerce,  proposed  the  patent 
system,  and,  generally,  served  the  role  of  mentor 
to  every  branch  and  every  phase  of  the  new  Gov 
ernment.  Other  splendid  statesmen  played  their 
important  part  in  these  concerns.  Always,  the 
influence  of  Washington,  to  whom  Hamilton  was 
like  a  brother,  was  tremendous  in  the  equation. 
But  when  all  is  said  and  done,  it  was  the  varie 
gated  genius  of  the  "Little  Lion"-— "Alexander, 
the  Great,"  he  was  called  by  his  jealous  enemies — 
equal  always  to  any  emergency,  which  made  the 
primal  contribution  to  the  pilotry  which  swept  the 
Ship  of  State  beyond  the  threatening  shoals.  A 
more  cosmopolitan  achievement  would  be  difficult 
for  the  imagination  to  conjure. 


278 


(greatest  American 

While  serving  his  country  and  his  President  as 
Master  Minister  in  the  Cabinets  of  State,  Hamilton 
found  time  to  demonstrate,  once  more,  his  profound 
fidelity  to  the  cause  of  popular  education.  On  No 
vember  12, 1792,  petitioners  headed  by  Samuel  Kirk- 
land  signed  a  memorial  praying  that  Hamilton  and 
fifteen  other  persons  "be  incorporated  by  the  name 
and  style  of  the  Trustees  of  Hamilton  Oneida 
Academy  at  Whitestown  in  the  County  of  Herki- 
mer"  in  the  State  of  New  York.  (Journal  of  the 
meeting  of  the  Regents  of  the  University  of  New 
York  State,  January  29,  1793.)  The  prayer  was 
granted  and  the  charter  issued,  with  Hamilton's 
name  at  the  head  of  the  sponsor-lists.  Kirkland, 
who  had  been  Washington's  agent  during  the 
Revolutionary  War  for  the  management  of  the 
Iroquois,  was  the  founder  of  this  school;  but  Ham 
ilton  was  its  inspiration  and  to  it,  as  was  his  habit, 
he  gave  the  best  within  him.  The  original  plan 
contemplated  an  ambitious  project  to  meet  the 
Indian  menace,  which  constantly  threatened  from 
the  west,  by  processes  of  education  through  which 
Red  Men  and  Whites  should  be  taught  together 
in  one,  common  institution.  Washington's  entire 
Cabinet  approved  the  adventure,  depending,  as 
usual,  upon  Hamilton  to  function  for  the  govern- 

279 


<6reate*t  Smerfcon 

mental  group.  Baron  Steuben  laid  the  corner 
stone.  But  the  Indians  in  general  proved  in 
capable  of  receiving  education  and  the  Whites  alone 
have  been  the  beneficiaries.  These  beneficiaries, 
however,  down  through  twelve  decades,  link  the 
name  of  Hamilton  with  one  of  the  greatest  among 
America's  great  schools.  Twenty  years  after  its 
original  incorporation,  the  Hamilton  Oneida 
Academy  was  invested  with  the  collegiate  powers 
and  privileges  which  it  has  since  broadly  and  use 
fully  exercised  across  the  span  of  a  century  of  edu 
cation.  Hamilton  College  at  Clinton,  New  York, 
stands  today  as  perhaps  the  greatest,  tangible 
memorial  to  America's  "Alexander,  The  Great" 
in  the  whole  land;  and  in  its  fine  traditions,  its 
brilliant  record  and  its  superb  ideals  it  is  worthy 
the  historic  name  it  bears. 

In  connection  with  the  exercises  of  its  one  hun 
dred  and  sixth  commencement  week,  June,  1918, 
the  College  accepted  and  unveiled  a  statue  of 
Hamilton,  the  gift  of  Thomas  Redfield  Proctor 
of  Utica,  New  York,  and  the  work  of  George  T. 
Brewster.  The  formal  address  of  acceptance  was 
delivered  by  Elihu  Root,  Chairman  of  the  Board  of 
Trustees  of  Hamilton  College  and  one  of  its  most 
distinguished  alumni.  For  the  purposes  of  this 

280 


'••  ...  N  ' ' 
The  Hamilton  Statue  on  Hamilton  College  Campus  at  Clinton,  New  York 


Smertcan 

volume,  it  is  prophetically  interesting  to  quote 
briefly  from  Mr.  Root's  eloquent  address  upon  that 
memorable  occasion. 

"We  raise  statues  to  Alexander  Hamilton," 
said  he,  "because  the  lessons  of  a  century  and  a 
quarter  have  shown  that  the  people  of  the  United 
States  owe  to  him  a  greater  debt  for  the  creation  of 
the  American  Republic  than  to  any  other  man 
save  Washington.  He  was  not  greater  than  Wash 
ington,  but  the  high  quality  and  power  and  intense 
devotion  and  splendid  achievement  of  his  service 
for  the  cause  of  ordered  liberty  through  self-gov 
ernment,  set  him  next  to  Washington.  The  two 
supplemented  each  other  and  worked  together  in 
perfect  confidence  and  affection  with  a  single  pur 
pose  and  the  same  just  conception  of  the  essence  of 
a  Government  that  should  reconcile  liberty  and 
obedience  to  law,  independence  and  peace,  sov 
ereignty  and  honor.  Together  they  endured  de 
traction  and  public  abuse,  and  strove  against 
ignorance  and  folly,  and  selfishness  and  prejudice 
and  malice,  against  intriguers  and  demagogues 
and  traitors,  through  the  critical  period  which 
followed  the  recognition  of  independence,  when 
the  principles  of  the  new  Nation  had  to  be  deter 
mined,  and  the  institutions  to  give  them  effect  had 

281 


(greatest  Smerican 

to  be  established.  At  the  end  of  that  first  forma 
tive  period  the  great-hearted  character  of  Wash 
ington  and  the  marvelous  insight  of  Hamilton's 
genius  into  the  principles  that  control  human  con 
duct,  had  given  to  the  future  of  mankind  the  in 
stitutions  of  government,  which  after  a  century's 
test  of  human  weakness,  of  domestic  and  foreign 
war,  of  vast  growth  and  prosperity,  now  bind  to 
gether  one  hundred  million  people  in  the  effective 
exercise  of  power  to  preserve  Christian  civiliza 
tion,  and  to  defend  their  liberty  and  the  world's 
liberty.  Hamilton  was  not  greater  than  Lincoln, 
but  if  there  had  been  no  Hamilton,  probably 
there  would  have  been  no  Lincoln,  because  there 
would  have  been  no  Union  for  Lincoln  to  save. 
.  .  .  Alexander  Hamilton  was  the  greatest 
teacher  of  the  art  of  self-government  in  the  history 
of  the  world.  ...  It  is  due  to  Hamilton  more 
than  to  any  other  save  Washington  that  this 
people  have  a  conception,  a  tradition,  an  ideal,  of 
a  Nation  whose  power  is  a  bulwark  of  liberty,  so 
that  they  are  willing  to  make  sacrifice  for  it,  feel 
ing  that  when  they  give  up  for  it  their  means  and 
their  peaceful  careers,  and  their  lives,  and  the 
lives  of  those  dear  to  them,  they  are  laying  their 
offerings  on  the  altar  of  liberty,  enlarging  power 

282 


<©reategt  American 


for  the  moment  that  liberty  may  live.  This  granite 
may  crumble,  this  bronze  may  corrode,  this  College 
may  be  dissolved;  but  the  monument  of  his  work 
will  remain." 


Contemplate  him,  at  thirty-six,  stepping  be 
yond  the  functions  of  his  Treasury  post,  to  domi 
nate  America's  decisions  in  the  first  great  crisis  in 
foreign  policy  which  faced  the  new  United  States. 
Four  days  after  the  news  had  arrived  that  revo 
lutionary  France  and  England  had  clashed  in  war, 
Hamilton  wrote  Jay,  urging  the  need  of  a  declara 
tion  of  American  neutrality.  He  sent  post-haste 
to  Mt.  Vernon  urging  Washington's  immediate 
presence  in  Philadelphia  to  order  a  decisive  course. 
With  characteristic  prospicience,  he  saw  the  neces 
sity—and,  at  the  same  time,  the  opportunity — for 
separating  American  destiny  from  European  fates, 
perhaps  once  and  for  all.  Jefferson  was  Secretary 
of  State  and  nominally  responsible  for  the  han 
dling  of  foreign  relations.  But  he  was  opposed  to 
affirmative  action.  He  favored  "  watchful  wait 
ing,"  to  borrow  a  term  of  modern  implication.  He 
loved  France  and  the  basic  ideas  of  her  revolution. 
He  had  behind  him  all  that  popular  gratitude  that 

283 


(Greatest  American 

France  had  won,  in  America,  through  Lafayette, 
and  all  that  popular  prejudice  that  England  had 
inspired  through  George.  For  him,  American 
neutrality  was  probably  not  sufficiently  pro- 
French.  He  sought  to  identify  both  Washington 
and  Hamilton  with  a  "British  party/'  For  one  of 
his  professional  subtlety,  this  was  a  simple  matter. 
But  the  truth  was  that  Hamilton  cared  nought  for 
either  France  or  England.  He  had  an  eye  single 
to  the  welfare  of  his  own  country,  and  he  was  de 
termined  that  the  new  world's  order  should  stand 
apart  from  old  world  dominion  or  sinister  influence. 
He  was  the  original  exponent  of  "America  First 
and  Last,"  to  borrow  and  amplify  another 
expressive,  modern  idiom. 

Washington  gathered  his  Cabinet  together. 
Jefferson  and  Hamilton  presented  their  ideas. 
Jefferson  was  over-ruled.  The  Cabinet  was  firm 
in  its  allegiance  to  Hamilton's  vigorous  views. 
Neutrality  was  ordained — the  only  concession  to 


J> 

,:-      j 


efferson's  feelings  being  that  the  word  itself  was 
omitted.  The  first,  great  principle  in  America's 
traditional  foreign  policy  thus  was  established ;  and 
though  it  was  greeted  with  violent  execrations  by 
the  radicals,  and  temporarily  abandoned  during 
ten  years  of  subsequent,  bitter,  political  conflict, 

284 


(greatest  American 

including  three  years  of  foreign  war,  it  remains 
to  this  day  a  cardinal  philosophy  in  the  American 
heart — as  most  recently  demonstrated  by  the 
electoral  results  of  President  Wilson's  "solemn 
referendum "  in  which  his  "League  of  Nations/' 
with  its  interwoven  internationalism  and  inter- 
continentalism,  failed,  by  wide  margin,  of  American 

!  , 

popular  approval. 

In  the  light  of  this  episode,  it  is  easy  to  trace 
the  source  of  those  incandescent  sentences  in 
Washington's  Farewell  Address  which  implore 

^^.,*m,  *tm>mtn   *  •!  J  MMi«^|«»MgMM^^     '***  i 

American  posterity  to  abjure  "permanent,  in 
veterate  antipathies  against  particular  nations  and 
passionate  attachments  for  others"  lest  it  become 
a  "slave  to  its  animosity  or  its  affections."  It  is 
easy  to  locate  inspiration  for  those  historic  warn 
ings  against  foreign  entanglements.  "In  no  one 
respect  did  the  individuality  of  Hamilton  impress 
itself  more  directly  on  the  future  of  the  United 
States." *  As  a  matter  of  fact,  here  was  the  cradle 
of  that  other  great  American  policy  which  ulti^0  ;LJ4  r  ] 

mately  was  to  be  adorned  with  the  name  of  one  of  , 

s****  o ,  5 !/-'/ 

Hamilton's  most  unscrupulous  traducers.    The  Pro 
clamation  of  Neutrality  was  the  original  promulga- 
tion  of  the  "Monroe  Doctrine."     Its  first  inkling 
1  Life  of  Hamilton,  by  Senator  Lodge. 

285 


(greatest  American 

had  appeared  twelve  years  before  in  "The  Con- 
tinentalist"  when  Hamilton  urged  that,  after  the 
final  triumph  of  the  American  colonies,  it  should 
be  the  unfailing  purpose  of  our  public  policy  to 
prevent  for  all  time  any  further  European  inter 
ference  with  the  affairs  of  the  whole  known  North 
American  continent.  Even  then,  before  Corn- 
wallis  had  yielded  up  his  sword  at  Yorktown,  this 
youthful  patriot-seer  leaped  decades  with  his 
vision.  "The  spectacle  of  Monroe,  the  defeated 
but  undiscouraged  assailant  of  Hamilton's  private 
honor  and  public  policy,  roaring  most  nobly  to  all 
the  ages  out  of  the  stolen  skin  of  the  '  Little  Lion,' 
is  possibly  the  crowning  triumph  of  a  great  idea." ' 


Contemplate  him,  at  forty,  heroically  choosing 
to  strip  the  veils  from  every  last  detail  of  the  only 
incidental  scandal  that  ever  blemished  his  private 
life,  rather  than  expediently  to  leave  a  shred  of  sus 
picion  against  the  impeccable  integrity  of  his  pub 
lic  works.  It  is  probably  a  paradox  to  say  that  an 
immoral  episode  can  exhibit  a  moral  triumph;  and 
yet  it  is  the  truth  that  Hamilton's  conduct  in  the 
notorious  "Reynolds  case"  testifies  to  a  grandeur 

1  Oliver's  Alexander  Hamilton. 

286 


<©reate$t  American 

of  character  rarely  found  in  the  chronicles  of  hu 
man  passion.  "It  is  to  be  lamented,"  Washing 
ton  once  said,  "that  great  characters  are  seldom 
without  blot."  It  would  be  pleasant  to  think  that 
a  great  hero  is  devoid  of  delinquency — though  few 
are;  but  it  is  the  human  fact  that  in  the  summer  of 
1791,  Hamilton  drifted  into  an  intrigue  with  a 
worthless  woman  by  the  name  of  Reynolds,  who 
first  imposed  upon  his  notorious  willingness  to  help 
the  troubled,  then  commercialized  her  advantage 
for  the  benefit  of  a  renegade  husband,  and  finally 
submitted  herself  to  be  the  agent  of  the  vilest  con 
spiracy  in  the  history  of  American  politics.  The 
story  is  not  a  pleasant  contemplation  from  the 
view-point  of  a  friendly,  Hamiltonian  biographer. 
But  candor  compels  that  it  be  set  down  in  its  true 
light;  and  a  fair  estimate  of  the  whole  miserable 
episode  must  concede  that  it  proves  Hamilton  the 
possessor  of  a  moral  courage  of  exemplary  degree, 
even  as  it  casts  a  dark  stain  upon  the  honor  of 
James  Monroe.  Indeed,  it  provided  the  occasion 
for  such  a  display  of  uncompromising  moral  steel, 
that  Hamilton  comes  from  the  incident  unique 
among  all  those  of  our  great  men  whose  failings 
have  been  known  but  charitably  screened. 

The  husband  of  this  Reynolds  woman  appeared 

287 


(greatest  American 

conveniently  upon  the  scene,  according  to  time- 
honored  formula,  and  was  paid  a  thousand  dollars 
to  console  his  pretended  griefs.  This  was  fol 
lowed  by  subsequent  payments  in  small  amounts 
as  Reynolds*  misfortunes  seemed  to  justify  assist 
ance.  Fifteen  months  later  Reynolds  ran  foul  of 
the  Treasury  Department  which,  in  the  routine  of 
duty  and  without  the  knowledge  of  its  chief,  prose 
cuted  him  for  subornation  of  perjury  in  a  case  of 
fraud.  Hamilton  high-mindedly  refused  to  inter 
fere,  and  vengeful  spite  sent  Reynolds  to  Hamil 
ton's  political  enemies  as  soon  as  the  prison  term 
was  done.  Speaker  Muhlenberg,  Venables  and 
James  Monroe  became  the  confidants  of  Reynolds 
and  his  wife.  The  story  told  them  was  that  Ham 
ilton  had  frequently  supplied  Reynolds  with  money 
with  which  to  speculate  for  their  joint  account  in 
old  Confederation  securities  which  Hamilton's 
assumption  policies  heavily  multiplied  in  market 
values.  The  resultant  charge  was  infidelity  to 
public  trust  so  gross  that  Reynolds  declared  his 
documents  would  suffice  to  "hang  the  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury. " 

This  gleeful  trio  of  hostile  politicians,  long  denied 
the  slightest  opportunity  to  force  their  Nemesis  to 
fight  defensively,  waited  upon  Hamilton  and  told 

288 


(greatest  American 

him  what  they  had  found.  Hamilton  never  hesi 
tated  for  a  moment.  His  rectitude  was  so  in 
grained  that  there  was  not  the  flicker  of  a  doubt  in 
his  acceptance  of  the  hard,  pitiless  alternative  he 
would  pursue.  Promptly  he  disclosed  the  whole 
truth  in  its  utmost  detail  and  candor.  Nothing 
was  held  back.  His  three  visitors  were  chagrined 
to  find  they  had  been  duped.  In  Hamilton's  own 
words,1  "the  result  was  a  full  and  unequivocal 
acknowledgment  on  the  part  of  the  three  gentle 
men,  of  perfect  satisfaction  with  the  explanation, 
and  expressions  of  regret  at  the  trouble  and  em 
barrassment  which  had  been  occasioned  to  me. 
Mr.  Muhlenberg  and  Mr.  Venables,  in  particular, 
manifested  a  degree  of  sensibility  on  the  occasion. 
Mr.  Monroe  was  more  cold,  but  entirely  explicit/' 

With  typical  precision,  Hamilton  promptly  and 
voluntarily  put  complete  memoranda  in  the  hands 
of  all  three  men  to  clinch  the  proofs  of  his  public 
probity,  and  all  agreed  that  the  situation  merited 
complete,  confidential  secrecy.  It  remained  for 
James  Monroe  to  break  this  faith.  Five  years 
later,  stung  by  recall  from  Paris  which  he  blamed 
to  Hamilton's  influence  with  Washington,  he, 
according  to  circumstantial  evidence  convincing 

1  Vol.  VII.,  Works  of  Alexander  Hamilton. 
'9  289 


Greatest  American 

beyond  a  reasonable  doubt,  saw  to  it  that  these 
complete  memoranda  reached  a  disreputable  pub 
lisher,  Callender  by  name,  whose  moral  status  is 
amply  fixed  by  his  prosecution  for  sedition  in  1800, 
and  whose  fidelities  are  amply  pictured  by  his  sub 
sequent  alleged  revelations  regarding  the  private 
life  of  Jefferson,  his  erstwhile  patron. 

Callender  revived  the  charge  of  official  corrup 
tion  against  Hamilton,  based  on  the  Reynolds* 
exhibit,  though  at  the  time  he  knew  the  black 
falsity  of  his  criminal  libel.  Politics  was  no  parlor 
pastime  in  that  day  of  passions  as  primitive  as  the 
methods  of  their  cruel  expression.  Callender  and 
his  sponsors  put  futile  confidence  in  a  belief  that 
Hamilton  would  not  dare  brave  a  disclosure  of  the 
true  facts.  They  felt  that,  since  his  public  work 
was  largely  a  closed  book,  he  would  choose  the 
alternative  of  sitting  silent  or,  at  most,  entering  but 
feeble  and  vague  protest  against  these  post-mortem 
aspersions  upon  his  public  honor.  They  well  knew 
his  pride  and  his  abhorrence  of  paraded  personali 
ties.  But  they  did  not  understand  that  he  put 
his  integrity  and  his  pure  country-love  above  all 
else  in  all  the  world. 

After  a  brief  correspondence,  in  which  Venables 
and  Muhlenberg  repudiated  the  disclosures  as  a 

290 


(greatest  American 

breach  of  honor  as  well  as  a  base  libel,  while  Monroe 
whined  a  lame  and  halting  alibi,  Hamilton  elected 
to  go  to  the  people  with  the  whole  sordid  tale ;  and, 
as  usual  with  him,  once  committed  to  the  task,  he 
did  it  with  a  thoroughness  that  left  nothing  to  be 
said  when  he  was  done.  At  bitter  cost  in  griefs 
that  smote  his  heart  and  bowed  down  those  who 
were  near  and  dear  to  him,  he  published  all  the  facts 
in  as  courageous  a  pamphlet  as  ever  came  from 
human  pen.  He  spared  nothing  and  pleaded  no 
palliation.  His  sole  aim  was  to  put  his  public 
honesty  beyond  attack.  Says  one  commentator: 
' '  No  one  has  yet  been  found  bold  enough  to  chal 
lenge  the  completeness  of  his  vindication." *  Says 
another:  "The  manliness  of  the  act,  the  self-in 
flicted  punishment,  and  the  high  sense  of  public 
honor  thus  exhibited,  silenced  even  his  opponents; 
but  the  confession  was  one  which  must  have  wrung 
Hamilton  to  the  quick,  and  it  shows  an  amount  of 
nerve  and  determination  for  which  our  history  can 
furnish  no  parallel."2 

Hamilton  had  his  human  faults.     "  There  are 
spots  even  on  the  disc  of  the  sun."3     The  infallible 

1  Oliver's  Alexander  Hamilton. 

2  Life  of  Hamilton,  by  Senator  Lodge. 

3  Life  and  Times  of  Alexander  Hamilton,  by  Schmucker. 

291 


<§reate*t  American 


mortal  has  not  yet  graced  the  earth.  The  wonder 
is  that  the  pitiless  scrutiny  under  which  Hamilton 
had  to  live  every  hour  of  his  career  should  have 
found  so  little  to  capitalize  against  his  name  and 
fame.  Posterity  knows  his  whole  story.  There 
are  no  inherited  whisperings  that  attribute  weak 
nesses  at  which  we  are  supposed  to  wink  indul 
gently,  as  in  the  case  of  many  another  leader. 
His  rectitude  of  general  conduct  is  but  emphasized 
by  the  single  exception  which  assiduous  character- 
assassins  finally  disclosed. 

It  would  be  multiplied  injustice  to  assume,  from 
the  Reynolds  incident,  that  Hamilton  was  an  un 
faithful  husband.  On  the  contrary,  he  loved  his 
wife  and  his  family  with  intense  affections  down  to 
the  hour  of  his  death.  He  was  always  happiest 
when  in  the  bosom  of  his  family.  When  Mrs. 
Hamilton,  his  widow,  died  at  the  ripe  old  age  of 
ninety-seven,  a  verse  of  love  devotion  written  when 
Hamilton  was  a  youth  attached  to  Washington's 
headquarters,  was  found  in  a  little  bag  about  her 
neck  —  the  talisman  of  a  reciprocated  life's  affec 
tions.  The  perfect  generosity  of  his  rare  nature 
was  never  more  clearly  shown  than  in  his  relations 
with  those  near  and  dear.  The  Reynolds  incident 
demonstrated  nothing  of  a  fundamental  character, 

292 


Mrs.  Alexander  Hamilton 

From  the  painting  by  Inman 


(greatest  American 

except  as  it  demonstrated  a  purity  of  public  pur 
pose  so  lofty  that  it  conquers  every  other  senti 
ment  which  contemplation  of  this  unhappy  episode 
might  otherwise  arouse. 


Contemplate  Hamilton  at  forty-seven,  struck 
down  by  an  assassin's  bullet  and  mourned  by  an 
entire  nation  with  a  fervid  grief  which  could  not 
have  pronounced  a  greater  tribute  to  the  people's 
love  for  any  man.  The  news  that  the  superb 
Washington  had  passed  to  the  eternities  did  not 
occasion  more  profound  and  universal  sorrow. 
Probably  the  nearest  historical  parallel  came  in 
later  years  when  the  noble  Lincoln  was  swept  to 
his  martyrdom.  Modern  generations,  familiar 
with  the  country's  reflex  when  Garfield  and 
McKinley  were  shot,  can  probably  but  illy  judge 
the  state  of  public  mind  when  hastening  couriers 
spread  the  crushing  bulletins  to  the  young  Repub 
lic  that  the  man  who  was  its  greatest  reliance  had 
been  done  to  his  death.  A  pall  fell  upon  the  na 
tion.  Beneath  it,  white  anger  against  the  wanton 
murderer  vied  with  sorrow  for  his  victim  for  pos 
session  of  the  nation's  soul.  "He  had  been  the 
brain  of  the  American  Army  in  his  boyhood;  he 

293 


(greatest  American 

had  conceived  an  empire  in  his  young  twenties; 
he  had  poured  his  genius  into  a  sickly  infant,  and 
set  it,  a  young  giant,  on  its  legs,  when  he  was  under 
two  score.  Almost  all  things  had  come  to  him  by 
intuition,  for  he  had  lived  in  advance  of  much 
knowledge." x  Likewise,  his  country,  by  intuition, 
had  come  to  expect  that  his  genius  and  his  courage 
would  be  equal  to  any  emergency  demanding  su 
perior  leadership  which  might  arise.  Partisan 
though  he  came  to  be  in  the  necessary  execution 
of  his  far-flung  undertakings  for  his  country,  all 
honorable  men  acknowledged  his  granite  integrity, 
his  steel-true  heart,  the  unselfishness  of  his  ideals, 
his  devotion  to  the  common  weal,  and  his  miracu 
lous  ability  to  meet  exigency  with  dominating  re 
source.  His  death,  then,  came  to  all  as  a  national 
calamity.  To  the  gripping,  inconsolable  sorrow 
of  his  friends  and  the  unfeigned  respect  of  his 
political  enemies,  was  added  a  well-nigh  universal 
wrath,  nursed  in  every  patriotic  breast,  that 
America  should  have  been  robbed  of  such  a  colossal 
friend  in  the  very  prime  of  his  middle  years  and  at 
the  apex  of  his  potential  utility  to  a  country  that 
could  illy  spare  the  greatest  of  her  constructive 
patrons. 

1  The  Conqueror,  by  Gertrude  Atherton. 

294 


<§reate#t  American 

The  nation  stood  in  blackest  mourning  and 
watched  the  solemn  cortege  that  reverently  bore 
Hamilton  to  his  long,  last  home.  Soldiers,  Judges, 
Governors,  Senators,  foreign  Diplomats,  Teachers — 
all  joined  the  solemn  march.  It  was  as  a  composite 
picture  representative  of  all  the  diversity  of  talents 
which  had  made  the  martyr  supreme  in  so  many 
useful  fields  of  vigorous  endeavor.  Guns  boomed 
upon  the  battery  and  echoing  answers  flung  back 
the  requiem  from  warships  in  the  bay.  All  busi 
ness  closed  its  doors,  and  massed  citizenship 
thronged  the  packed  thoroughfares  to  render 
homage  that  was  richly  due.  Death  brought  un 
reserved,  universal  gratitude  to  the  funeral  bier. 
The  affections  of  a  nation,  shocked  by  tragedy  into 
completest  realization  of  its  love  and  loss,  paid 
rich  toll.  The  whole  story  of  the  United  States 
does  not  disclose  a  more  appealing  epic. 

Over  the  flag-draped  coffin,  deposited  in  Trinity 
Churchyard's  gate,  the  heart- wrung  Morris  poured 
out  the  impassioned  eloquence  that  spoke  for  a 
stricken  people. 

"  Hamilton  disdained  concealment/'  Morris 
cried.  ''Knowing  the  purity  of  his  heart,  he  bore 
it,  as  it  were,  in  his  hand,  exposing  to  every  pas 
senger  its  inmost  recesses.  Generous  indiscretion 

295 


(greatest  American 


subjected  him  to  censure  from  misrepresentation. 
His  speculative  opinions  were  treated  as  deliberate 
designs.  But  I  declare  to  you  before  God,  in  whose 
presence  we  are  now  so  especially  assembled,  that 
in  his  most  private  and  confidential  conversations, 
his  sole  subject  of  discussion  was  your  freedom  and 
happiness.  He  never  lost  sight  of  your  interests. 
For  himself  he  feared  nothing  ;  but  he  feared  that  bad 
men  might,  by  false  professions,  acquire  your  con 
fidence  and  abuse  it  to  your  ruin.  He  was  ambi 
tious  only  of  glory,  but  he  was  deeply  solicitous 
for  you." 

Until  sun-down,  the  bells  of  Manhattan  tolled 
the  knell  of  parting  life.  New  York,  and  all  the 
people  wore  mourning  for  a  month,  the  Bar  for 
six  weeks.  Never  in  human  contribution  to  re 
publican  institutions  and  the  destinies  of  progres 
sive,  autonomous  freedom,  had  one  man  done  so 
much  in  so  few  years.  A  modest  monument,  in 
due  time,  was  raised  above  his  grave.  Indeed,  it 
is  so  modest  as  to  be  nothing  more  than  incon 
spicuous  in  this  modern  day  when  grateful  pos 
terity  has  been  so  prodigal  in  memorializing  its 
debt  to  other  patriots  who  helped  make  possible  the 
institutions  of  the  United  States.  Upon  it  stands 
this  moderate  inscription: 

296 


•  v;tifeM 


By  Underwood  &  Underwood 

Hamilton's  Tomb  in  Trinity  Churchyard,  New  York  City 


(greatest  Slmertcan 

To  the  Memory  of 

ALEXANDER    HAMILTON 

The  Corporation  of  Trinity  Have  Erected  This 

Monument 
In  Testimony  Of  Their  Respect 

For 
The  Patriot  Of  Incorruptible  Integrity 

The  Soldier  Of  Approved  Valour 

The  Statesman  Of  Consummate  Wisdom 

Whose  Talents  And  Virtues  Will  Be  Admired 

By 

Grateful  Posterity 
Long  After  This  Marble  Shall  Have  Mouldered  To 

Dust 
He  Died  July  I2th,  1804,     Aged  47. 

In  the  historical  perspective  which  the  unfold 
ing  years  have  brought  to  the  mighty  nation  which 
he  endowed  with  prodigal  service  and  devotion,  to 
this  modest  epitaph  upon  this  modest  tomb  might 
properly  be  added  a  final,  all-inclusive  phrase,  the 
verdict  of  posterity — "The  Greatest  American." 


PART  THREE 


299 


Conclusion 

IT  is  of  vastly  less  consequence  to  determine 
one  "Greatest  American"  than  it  is  to  encourage 
familiarity  with  all  "Greatest  Americans. "  In 
its  dialectic  conclusions,  this  ingenuous  essay  stands 
true  to  its  foreword.  Its  fundamental  aspiration 
is  to  recall  the  minds  of  men  and  women  to 
a  more  sustained  and  verified  consideration  of 
the  whole  history  of  their  native  land,  particu 
larly  in  relation  to  its  foundations.  The  method 
chosen  has  been  a  challenge  to  America's  mass 
habit,  amounting  almost  to  a  legend,  generally  of 
excluding  all  but  Washington  and  Lincoln  from  the 
catalogue  of  super-great.  The  same  method  shall 
persist  in  this  epilogue. 

If  Alexander  Hamilton  is  not  entitled,  all  things 
considered,  to  be  called  "The  Greatest  American," 
rebuttal  must  search  history  for  its  validating 
proofs;  and  such  a  search,  regardless  of  its  outcome, 
will  make  any  pilgrim  inspirationally  stronger  in 
fealty  to  the  institutions  of  the  United  States. 

301 


(greatest  American 

This  is  one  case  where  familiarity  breeds  respect 
rather  than  contempt.  If,  on  the  other  hand, 
Hamilton  deserves  his  wreath,  consent  to  his 
decoration  thusly,  must  carry  with  it  accompany 
ing  consent  that  the  basic,  patriotic  philosophies  for 
which  he  strove  and  died,  are  the  strongest  threads 
in  the  fabric  of  American  citizenship.  Eliminat 
ing  things  of  faction  and  of  partisan  evolution  from 
the  record,  no  straight  thinker  can  deny  that  a  re 
naissance  in  these  philosophies — unselfish  loyalty, 
constructive  public  service,  imperishable  fealty  to 
the  Constitution  and  its  purport,  unhyphenated 
dedication  of  every  conscience  to  the  paramount 
welfare  of  the  United  States — would  be  a  blessed 
benediction  upon  American  to-morrows.  In  either 
event,  then,  the  study  is  worth  while. 

Opinion  is  not  fact.  It  is  merely  the  interpreta 
tion  of  fact.  No  opinion  can  claim  infallibility. 
One  man's  " Greatest  American"  may  be  quite  as 
eligible  to  title  as  another's.  American  oppor 
tunities,  down  through  the  years,  have  developed 
a  tremendous  corps  of  leaders  from  among  whom 
seemly  choice  is  defensible  in  a  variety  of  exalted 
directions.  So  catholic  is  this  invitation  that 
Thomas  Jefferson,  though  necessarily  denied  any 
such  credentials  by  any  partisan  of  Hamilton's, 

302 


(greatest  American 

can  be  builded  into  formidable  posture  by  any 
advocate  who  is  willing  to  dissect  the  story  of  his 
life  and  works  under  sympathetic  microscope. 
There  are  powerful  arguments,  depending  on  the 
point  of  view,  that  may  be  advanced  for  other 
favorites — from  Roger  Williams  down  to  Wilson. 
There  are  no  chains  or  formula  to  restrict  imagina 
tion  or  analysis  in  these  respects.  For  George 
Washington  and  Abraham  Lincoln,  there  exists  a 
positively  proprietary  right  to  primal  fame.  Their 
eligibility  is  an  axiom.  All  these  estimates  de 
pend  upon  the  nature  of  the  rule  and  measure  that 
shall  be  supplied. 

But  if  "The  Greatest  American" — which,  be  it 
understood,  is  a  relative  phrase  and  not  a  pretense 
that  the  maximum,  foreclosing  type  of  excellence 
has  been  attained  beyond  competitive  improve 
ment — is  that  faithful  citizen  who  has  displayed 
the  widest  diversity  of  communally  useful  talents, 
it  is  the  contention  of  this  volume  that  choice 
must  lie  between  Benjamin  Franklin,  Theodore 
Roosevelt  and  Alexander  Hamilton. 

Then,  if  the  final  quest  be  for  that  devoted 
patriot  whose  diversity  of  talents  has  functioned 
most  concretely  for  the  people  and  the  institutions 
of  the  United  States,  it  is  the  contention  of  this 

303 


(greatest  American 


volume  that  logic  leads  to  Hamilton  and  names 
him  first. 

Speaking  in  terms  of  concrete  service,  there  is 
scarcely  anything  that  may  be  said  for  others  that 
may  not  be  said  for  him;  and  the  eloquent  differ 
ence  is  that  while  others  usually  depend  upon  one, 
great,  paramount  motif  for  their  fame,  Hamilton's 
career  encompasses  all  these  motifs,  like  a  melting 
pot.  Roscoe  Conkling,  the  tremendous  character 
who  represented  New  York  in  the  United  States 
Senate  for  many  years,  once  said:  "Alexander 
Hamilton,  he  was  the  greatest  man  ever  produced 
by  this  hemisphere."1 

Lincoln  made  the  preservation  of  Union  supreme 
over  every  other  consideration  in  his  tremendous 
service  to  America  and  to  mankind.  In  this  pos 
ture,  however,  he  displayed  no  more  uncompromis 
ing  fidelities  than  did  Hamilton  three-quarters  of  a 
century  before.  It  has  been"  said  by  one  historian2 
that  Lincoln  "  lingered  in  the  era  of  Sam  Adams 
and  Patrick  Henry  rather  than  that  of  Ruf  us  King 
and  Alexander  Hamilton."  Only  in  the  literal 
sense  that  Lincoln  seemed  to  find  greater  inspira- 

1  Quoted  in  address  by  Thomas  Redfield  Proctor  at 
Hamilton  College,  June  17,  1918. 

a  Robert  W.  McLaughlin's  Washington  and  Lincoln. 

304 


(greatest  American 

tion  in  the  Declaration  of  Independence  than  in 
the  Constitution,  if  we  are  to  judge  by  his  writings, 
can  this  parallel  be  true.  Remembering  Henry's 
refusal  of  a  Virginia  seat  in  the  Constitutional 
Convention  in  1787  and  his  vehement  opposition 
to  Virginia's  ratification  of  the  Constitution  in 
1788;  remembering  how  the  whole  cause  of  Union, 
its  chance  of  healthy  birth  and  sturdy  youth,  hung 
utterly  and  absolutely  upon  the  successful  forma 
tion  and  acceptance  of  this  Constitution;  remem 
bering  how  Hamilton  dared  to  sign  the  Constitu 
tion,  singly  and  alone  for  the  pivotal  State  of  New 
York,  and  how  he  faced  and  conquered  the  hostile 
vendetta  which  sought  the  destruction  of  both  the 
Constitution  and  the  Union;  remembering,  in 
cidentally,  that  Hamilton  was  one  of  the  pillars  of 
the  first  American  Abolitionist  society — formed  in 
1784  to  accomplish  gradual  and  legal  emancipation 
—and  that  he  always  refused  to  own  a  slave;  it  is 
difficult  to  understand  how  any  appropriate  parallel 
in  history  can  do  other  than  put  Lincoln  and 
Hamilton  in  common  bracket.  Every  tribute  to 
Lincoln's  sturdy  and  unyielding  purpose  to  save 
the  Union  is  a  corollary  tribute  to  Hamilton's 
equally  sturdy  and  unyielding  purpose  to  give  the 
Union  effective  creation.  A  stream  can  rise  no 

305 


(greatest  American 

higher  than  its  source.     Hamilton  was  the  source, 
if  Lincoln  was  the  preserver,  of  effective  Union. 

Turn  back  to  the  eulogies  describing  Lincoln  in 
the  opening  chapter  of  this  book.  Extract  some  of 
the  meaty  sentences  with  which  Lincoln's  advo 
cates  verify  their  choice.  Contemplate  these  sen 
tences  in  the  abstract ;  and  see  how  perfectly  they 
fit  Hamilton  as  well  as  Lincoln.  "Only  divine 
providence  could  have  given  us  for  a  great  hour  of 
need  a  man  who  took  possession  of  the  hour  and 
lived  up  to  all  of  its  demands  in  a  perfectly  human 
fashion."  "A  martyr  whose  memory  will  become 
more  precious  as  men  learn  to  prize  those  principles 
of  constitutional  order  and  those  rights — civil, 
political  and  human — for  which  he  was  made  a 
sacrifice."  "He  was  a  man  of  vision  and  a  man 
who  had  the  capacity  for  putting  his  vision  into 
accomplishment."  "His  fine  fidelity  to  the  basic 
ideals  of  America."  "The  service  he  rendered  his 
country  is  unparalleled."  "His  pitiless  logic  for 
the  right."  "The  sterling  common  sense  with 
which  he  guided  the  country  through  the  greatest 
peril  of  its  national  life."  "He  had  all  the  talents 
of  ability  of  thought,  of  breadth  of  sympathy,  and 
power  of  will."  "He  was  the  whole  history  of  the 
American  people  of  his  time."  "His  singleness  of 

306 


Neatest  American 

purpose  to  fulfill  his  obligation  and  his  oath." 
"The  statesmanship,  almost  inspired,  which,  after 
having  formulated  in  terms  never  paralleled  for 
lucidity,  the  duty  of  a  nation  face  to  face  with  a 
crisis  involving  its  existence,  sustained  it  through 
the  trials,  reverses  and  sufferings." 

In  the  light  of  the  exhibits  that  have  been  sub 
mitted  in  the  second  section  of  this  volume,  can  it 
be  denied  that  every  one  of  these  high-spot  apos 
trophes  belong  to  Alexander  Hamilton?  Not 
that  they  do  not  belong  to  Lincoln,  too.  That  is 
not  the  point.  Of  course,  they  belong  to  Lincoln. 
The  point  is  that  the  student  who  hunts  biographi 
cal  history  with  analytical  eye,  finds  practically  all 
the  dominating  greatness  which  has  marked  all 
other  great  Americans,  in  the  composite  character 
and  service  of  Hamilton.  And  Lincoln  is  no  excep 
tion  to  the  rule.  There  is  not  a  quoted  word  in 
the  preceding  paragraph  which  does  not  accurately 
describe  Hamilton,  even  as  it  accurately  describes 
Lincoln.  Even  in  the  extraordinary  test  of  eman 
cipation,  it  may  well  be  contended  that  it  was  no 
greater  achievement  to  release  half-a-nation  of 
black  men  from  the  bonds  of  physical  slavery,  than 
it  was  to  release  a  whole  nation  of  white  men  from 
the  bonds  of  chaos.  It  is  not  argued  that  Hamil- 

307 


(greatest  American 

ton  was  greater  than  Lincoln  in  these  particular 
respects  which  deservedly  sanctify  the  blessed 
Lincolnian  memories.  It  is  merely  argued  that  he 
was  equally  as  great;  and  then,  that  he  went  on 
into  still  other  fields  of  human  service,  which  Lin 
coln  but  slightly  touched  or  did  not  touch  at  all, 
and  continued  his  same  colossal  stride. 

Washington's  dominating  credits  relate  to  win 
ning  independence,  as  a  soldierly  master  of  treach 
erous  situations,  and  to  consolidating  the  benefits 
thereof  in  permanent,  republican  institutions.  In 
these  aims,  however,  he  had  no  zeals  that  outran 
those  of  the  Military  Aide,  who  was^his  constant 
counselor  and  confidant,  nor  of  the  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury,  who  was  Coadjutor-President 
through  every  crisis  that  confronted  the  Republic's 
original  administrations.  Without  Washington's 
calm  grip  upon  the  confidence  of  the  people,  sup 
ported  by  a  divinity  of  unselfish  and  persevering 
devotion  to  the  cause  which  was  his  life,  Hamil 
ton's  far-flung  undertakings,  supported  always  by 
his  Chief,  might  have  suffered  premature  anaemia 
and  fateful  demise.  On  the  other  hand,  without 
Hamilton's  powers  of  vivid  exhortation  and  expres 
sion,  the  Revolution  might  not  have  been  organized 
and  maintained;  without  his  resolution  and  per- 

308 


<£lje  Creates;!  American 

suasion,  the  Constitutional  adventure  would  never 
have  been  launched;  and  without  his  towering 
capacities,  serving  every  legislative  and  adminis 
trative  emergency,  Washington's  administrations 
might  have  been  clogged  to  death.  Without  Ham 
ilton,  it  is  probable  there  would  have  been  no 
"Farewell  Address"  —the  clinging  trademark  on 
the  Father's  blessed  fame.  Colonel  Pickering, 
Postmaster-General,  Secretary  of  War,  and  later 
Secretary  of  State  in  Washington's  Cabinet,  con 
sidered  Hamilton  by  far  the  greatest  man  of  his 
time  and  country,  ranking  him  without  hesitation 
above  Washington.1  George  Ticknor  Curtis,  the 
eminent  historian,  years  later  wrote:  "The  ideas 
of  a  statesman  like  Hamilton,  earnestly  bent  on 
the  discovery  and  inculcation  of  truth,  do  not  pass 
away.  Wiser  than  those  by  whom  he  was  sur 
rounded,  with  a  deeper  knowledge  of  the  science 
of  government  than  most  of  them,  and  constantly 
enunciating  principles  which  extended  far  beyond 
the  temporizing  policy  of  the  hour,  the  smiles  of 
his  opponents  only  prove  to  posterity  how  far  he 
was  in  advance  of  them."  Guizot,  profound 
student,  said:  "Hamilton  must  be  classed  among 
the  men  who  have  best  known  the  vital  principles 
1  Life  of  Hamilton,  by  Lodge. 

309 


(greatest  American 


and  fundamental  conditions  of  government.  There 
is  not  in  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  an 
element  of  order,  of  force  or  of  duration,  which  he 
has  not  powerfully  contributed  to  introduce  into  it 
and  to  give  it  a  predominance."  The  truth  is  that 
he  was  the  brains  of  the  pilot  house  when  the  Ship 
of  State  started  on  her  perilous  journey  down  the 
lanes  of  time.  In  1794,  Madison  complained  of 
Hamilton's  ''mentor  ship  to  the  Commander-in- 
Chief  .  "  '  A  year  later,  Jefferson  wrote  to  Madison  : 
"Hamilton  is  really  a  colossus.  Without  numbers, 
he  is  an  host  within  himself."  Even  Burr  con 
fessed  :  '  '  He  who  puts  himself  on  paper  with  Hamil 
ton  is  lost."  John  Adams,  speaking  of  his  own 
Administration,  said:  "Hamilton  was  all  the  time 
the  Commander-in-Chief  of  the  House  of  Repre 
sentatives,  of  the  Senate,  of  the  Heads  of  Depart 
ments,  of  General  Washington,  and  last  and  least 
if  you  will  it,  of  the  President  of  the  United  States." 
Lord  Bryce,  in  his  admirable  and  discerning  work 
on  The  American  Commonwealth,  bears  this  testi 
mony  from  an  unprejudiced  vantage  ground:  "One 
cannot  note  the  disappearance  of  this  brilliant 
figure  (Hamilton),  to  Europeans  the  most  inter 
esting  in  the  earlier  history  of  the  Republic,  with- 

1  Letters  and  Other  Writings  of  James  Madison. 

310 


(greatest  American 

out  the  remark  that  his  countrymen  seem  to  have 
never,  either  in  his  lifetime  or  afterward,  duly 
recognized  his  splendid  gifts.  Washington  is,  in 
deed,  a  far  more  perfect  character.  .  .  .  But 
Hamilton,  of  a  virtue  not  so  flawless,  touches  us 
more  nearly,  not  only  by  the  romance  of  his  early 
and  his  tragic  death,  but  by  a  certain  ardor  and-/ 
impulsiveness,  and  even  tenderness  of  soul,  joined 
to  a  courage  equal  to  that  of  Washington  himself. 
Equally  apt  for  war  and  civil  government,  with  a 
profundity  and  amplitude  of  view  rare  in  practical 
soldiers  or  statesmen,  he  stood  in  the  front-rank  of 
a  generation  never  surpassed  in  history." 

Any  credits  given  Washington  for  inaugurating 
the  Government,  it  surely  must  be  confessed,  must 
be  shared  with  Hamilton;  just  as  any  credits  given 
Lincoln  for  saving  Union,  must  be  shared  with  his 
lineal  predecessor  in  these  works  and  faiths.  In 
deed,  if  an  intensely  practical  measure  be  applied, 
all  possibility  of  argument  must  disappear.  "Fi 
nancial  integrity  is  a  test  of  political  institutions," 
writes  Professor  Sumner  in  his  Hamiltonian  bi 
ography.  r  Whenever  they  decay  or  are  corrupted, 
the  evil  invariably  manifests  itself  in  financial 

1  Alexander  Hamilton,  by  Professor  William  Graham 
Sumner. 


<&reate*t  American 

abuses.  The  financial  vice  of  our  Revolutionary 
period  was  repudiation,  both  public  and  private. 
"It  was  the  States  which  were  the  stronghold  of 
it;  it  was  the  Union  which  had  to  combat  it. 
Therefore,  the  contest  with  anarchy  and  repudia 
tion  was  the  great  work  which  went  to  the  making 
of  this  nation  at  the  end  of  the  last  century,  and 
Alexander  Hamilton  was  one  of  the  leading  heroes 
of  it."  Hamilton,  as  a  matter  of  cold  truth  was 
more  than  ''one  of  the  heroes."  He  was  "the 
hero."  He  was  the  founder  of  the  structure  of 
sound  federal  finance  and  public  credit.  His 
brain  was  the  mint  in  which  its  plan  was  coined; 
his  ideas  were  its  currency  and  asset.  Therefore, 
since  Sumner  is  right  in  putting  "financial  in 
tegrity"  at  the  base  of  "political  institutions," 
Hamilton  was  at  the  base  of  the  Republic.  He 
had  neither  peer  nor  competitor  in  these  vital,  ele 
mentary  responsibilities.  Where  other  strong  men 
had  failed,  he  succeeded.  Our  history  does  not 
disclose,  then  or  since,  a  man  who  could  have  taken 
his  place.  Certainly  Washington  pretended  no 
such  talents.  His  most  earnest  enemies,  like  Jef 
ferson  and  Gallatin  and  Monroe,  lived  to  honor  his 
works  by  the  sincerest  of  all  compliments — emula 
tion  and  perpetuation.  He  was  one  man  among 

312 


<8reate*t  American 


millions  raised  for  the  occasion.  He  alone  was 
equal  to  the  basic  exigency  which  was  the  rock 
whereon  Washington's  Administration  —  and  the 
whole  great  republican  experiment  —  was  to  build 
or  break.  Without  him,  or  some  other  like  him 
who  did  not  appear,  but  whom  God  and  the  neces 
sity  might  have  erected  in  his  absence,  America's 
aspirations  would  have  been  bankrupt  and  her 
destiny  foreclosed. 

All  this  does  not  mean,  or  intend  to  insinuate 
the  absurd  pretense,  that  in  some  particulars  both 
Lincoln  and  Washington  were  not  greater,  in  char 
acter  and  service,  than  was  Hamilton.  Tolstoy 
has  called  Lincoln  "a  miniature  Christ."  John 
Drinkwater,  the  great  Briton  who  has  been  so 
brilliant  in  his  Lincolnian  interpretations,  has 
summed  up  Lincoln  as  the  embodiment  of  all 
Anglo-Saxon  virtues.  Lafayette  declared  :  '  '  In  my 
idea  General  Washington  is  the  greatest  man,  for  I 
look  upon  him  as  the  most  virtuous."  If  the  case 
were  epitomized  in  a  word,  it  can  be  said  that 
Washington  and  Lincoln  possessed  a  spirituality 
of  leadership  that  was  lacking  in  Hamilton's  neces 
sarily  practical  career  —  though  there  are  epics  in 
Hamilton's  career  which  approach  the  sublime  in 
character.  The  word  "spirituality,"  in  this  con- 


(greatest  American 

nection,  does  not  refer  to  religion.  Phillips  Brooks 
once  said:  "No  man  can  come  to  true  greatness 
who  has  not  felt  in  some  degree  that  his  life  belongs 
to  his  race,  and  that  what  God  gives  him,  He  gives 
him  for  mankind."  This  sort  of  spirituality, 
Hamilton  had  in  surpassing  measure.  As  for  his 
contact  with  all  these  higher  aspirations,  he  was 
a  sincere  and  earnest  Christian.1  He  said  of 
Christianity  in  his  firm  and  positive  way:  "I  have 
studied  it,  and  I  can  prove  its  truth  as  clearly  as 
any  proposition  ever  submitted  to  the  mind  of 
man."  But  the  spirituality  of  lofty  moral  char 
acter,  resting  for  its  eternal  dominion  upon  the 
influence  of  personality,  rather  than  the  urge  of 
deeds  alone,  attaches  to  Lincoln  and  Washington  in 
a  deserved  degree  which  Hamilton's  combativeness 
and  passions  deny.  Unquestionably,  too,  these  are 
important  elements  that  should  enter  the  deter 
mination  of  "The  Greatest  American."  Hamilton 
must  confess  to  certain  blemishes  that  Washing 
ton  and  Lincoln  did  not  know.  Yet  it  would  be  as 
unfair  to  rest  a  verdict  exclusively  upon  these  con 
siderations  called  "spiritual"  for  want  of  a  better 
word  as  it  would  to  crown  the  man  who  was  only 
our  greatest  economist,  or  only  our  greatest  diplo- 
1  Life  of  Hamilton,  by  John  T.  Morse,  Jr. 

3H 


(greatest  American 

mat,  or  only  our  bravest  warrior;  and  it  would  be 
equally  unfair  to  deny  that  Hamilton,  upon  many 
acid  occasions,  assayed  pure  gold  in  the  exalted 
character  which  he  disclosed  to  the  ages. 

But  it  is  diversity  of  talents,  diversity  of  service, 
diversity  of  contribution  in  essentials  to  American 
life  and  institutions,  that  this  volume  emphasizes 
as  the  measure  of  the  truest  pre-eminence.  Great 
ness  must  be  measured  in  the  ratio  of  its  composite 
elements;  and  more  of  these  elements  appeared  in 
Hamilton  than  in  any  other  man.  He  was  not  a 
'jfiack-of -all-trades  j  He  was  that  rare  novelty— 
a  master  of  all  trades.  He  was  superior  in  more 
fields  of  human  influence  and  action  than  any  other 
American  who  ever  lived.  He  had  fully  the  equal 
of  Franklin's  intellect.  "His  intellect/'  says  John 
Fiske, I  "seemed  to  have  sprung  forth  in  full  ma 
turity,  like  Pallas  from  the  brain  of  Zeus."  "I 
have  very  little  doubt,"  said  Chancellor f Kent ,^ 
upon  one  occasion,  "that  if  General  Hamilton  had 
lived  twenty  years  longer,  he  would  have  rivaled 
Socrates  or  Bacon,  or  any  of  the  sages  of  ancient 
or  modern  times,  in  researches  after  truth  and  in 
benevolence  to  mankind.  The  active  and  pro 
found  statesman,  the  learned  and  eloquent  lawyer, 

1  Essays,  Historical  and  Literary,  Vol.  II. 

315 


<6reate£t  American 

would  probably  have  disappeared  in  a  great  degree 
before  the  character  of  the  sage  philosopher,  in 
structing  mankind  by  his  wisdom  and  elevating  his 
country  by  his  example."  Franklin  was  a  miracu 
lously  many-sided  man.  Along  with  Theodore 
Roosevelt  and  Hamilton,  he  could  probably  boast 
a  greater  diversity  of  talents  than  any  other  Ameri 
can.  Yet,  save  for  his  research  in  the  natural 
sciences,  there  was  nothing  in  his  record  which 
Hamilton  could  not  have  done,  it  is  fair  to  assume, 
equally  well,  and  which  he  did  not  equivalently  do 
in  related  fields;  and  there  are  many  Hamiltonian 
achievements  that  would  have  been  notoriously 
impossible  in  Franklin's  hands. 

Roosevelt,  in  our  modern  day,  was  Hamilton- 
esque  in  many  reminiscent  ways.  He  could  do 
more  different  things  and  do  them  well  than  any 
other  man  with  whom  modern  generations  are 
familiar.  Col.  Raymond  Robins  of  Chicago  has 
put  the  case  this  way:  "Theodore  Roosevelt  was 
equally  at  home  with  prize  fighters  and  kings,  with 
cow-boys,  naturalists,  writers,  college  professors 
and  outdoor  men.  When  we  have  reached  25  we 
begin  to  understand  the  real  Lincoln.  When  we 
are  30,  we  grasp  something  of  the  calm,  dignity 
and  poise  of  Washington;  but  we  have  only  to  be 

316 


Greatest  American 

boys  before  we  get  the  message  of  Roosevelt. ' ' r  He 
was  a  soldier — but  less  conspicuously  than  Ham 
ilton.  He  was  at  the  same  time  a  man  of  peace, 
bringing  Russia  and  Japan  together  to  compose 
their  martial  differences  amid  the  granite  hills  of 
old  New  Hampshire.  Hamilton,  too,  was  a  man 
of  peace,  as  emphasized  courageously  in  his  in 
spiration  and  defense  of  the  Jay  Treaty  with 
England.  Roosevelt  built  the  Panama  Canal. 
But  Hamilton  was  the  original,  lonesome  propo 
nent,  in  America,  of  the  theory  and  system  of 
developing  waterways  at  federal  expense.  Roose 
velt  was  the  greatest  modern  prophet  of  an  aroused 
and  vigilant  nationalism.  But  Hamilton  was  the 
original  and  foremost  oracle  that  nationalism  ever 
had.  Both  could  command  the  emotions  of  an 
audience  with  tongue  or  pen.  Both  were  evangel 
ists  in  public  and  private  honesty  and  honor.  Yet, 
when  all  is  said  and  done/Hamilton  displayed  a 
genius  for  concrete  creation,  in  systems  and  ma 
chinery  of  government,  which  Roosevelt  may  have 
possessed,  but  never  faced  the  need  to  show;  and 
Hamilton  catered  to  crises  out-weighing  in  vitality 
anything  confronting  the  strenuous  "T.  R."  in 
the  more  sedate  days  of  the  nation's  life. 
1  Chicago  Tribune,  May  24,  1921. 

317  . 


(greatest  American 


You  find,  each  time  you  analyze,  that  the  major 
elements  of  greatness  that  have  entered  the  careers 
of  other  men,  are  all  duplicated  in  this  "  Little 
Lion."  No  man  is  perfect.  The  purest  mortals 
have  had  their  faults.  It  is  within  these  human 
limitations  that  human  tests  must  be  applied. 
But  within  these  limitations,  Hamilton  seems  to 
have  been  a  composite  of  the  genius  of  his  coun 
try,  from  the  beginning  down  to  date.  One  con 
tributor  to  this  book's  preliminary  symposium 
mentioned  Webster  as  first  favorite.  Apply  the 
rule  and  get  the  same  result.  Judge  Ambrose 
Spencer,  one  of  the  distinguished  jurists  of  his 
time,  is  quoted1  in  the  following  pointed  compli 
ment  and  comparison  :  '  '  Alexander  Hamilton  was 
the  greatest  man  this  country  ever  produced.  I 
knew  him  well.  I  was  in  situation  often  to  ob 
serve  and  study  him.  I  saw  him  at  the  bar  and  at 
home.  He  argued  cases  before  me  while  I  sat  as 
Judge  on  the  bench.  Webster  has  done  the  same. 
In  power  of  reasoning.  Hamilton  was  the  equal  of 
Webster;  and  more  than  this  can  be  said  of  no  man. 
In  creative  power,  Hamilton  was  infinitely  Web 
ster's  superior.  It  was  he,  more  than  any  other 
man,  who  thought  out  the  Constitution  of  the 

1  Life  of  Hamilton,  by  Senator  Lodge. 


American 

United  States  and  the  details  of  the  Govern 
ment  of  the  Union;  and  out  of  the  chaos  that 
existed  after  the  Revolution,  raised  a  fabric, 
every  part  of  which  is  instinct  with  his  thought. 
I  can  truly  say  that  hundreds  of  politicians 
and  statesmen  of  the  day  get  both  the  web  and 
woof  of  their  thoughts  from  Hamilton's  brains. 
He,  more  than  any  other  man,  did  the  thinking  of 
his  time." 

As  it  is  in  comparison  with  Webster,  so  is  it  in 
comparison  with  Samuel  J.  Tilden,  whom  another 
contributor  would  give  first  consideration.  Til- 
den's  claim  is  rested  on  his  ready  and  patriotic 
acquiescence  in  the  presidential  verdict  of  1876 
when  an  Electoral  Commission  counted  him  out  of 
the  White  House  and  seated  Rutherford  B.  Hayes 
by  a  thin  and  always-questioned  majority  of  one 
vote.  "Had  Tilden  asked  us,"  declares  former 
Vice-President  Marshall,  "we  would  have  grabbed 
our  guns,  gone  to  Washington  and  endeavored  to 
seat  him  regardless  of  the  result  to  the  peace  of  the 
Republic."  It  is  almost  uncanny  to  find  that 
even  in  this  unusual  and  peculiar  circumstance  of 
high,  patriotic  service,  Hamilton's  omnifarious 
career  again  provides  relative  precedent  and 
parallel.  The  presidential  elections  of  1800,  when 


Greatest  American 

a  tie  vote  between  Thomas  Jefferson  and  Aaron 
Burr  threw  the  decision  into  the  House  of  Repre 
sentatives,  might  easily  have  hastened  a  Civil 
War  by  sixty  years.  The  crisis  was  infinitely 
nearer  breach  and  disaster  than  in  1876.  In  the 
frenzied  wrath  engendered  by  defeat  at  the  polls, 
the  Federalists  holding  the  balance  of  power  in  the 
House,  were  keen  to  throw  their  support  to  Burr, 
nominally  running  as  a  vice-presidential  candidate 
with  Jefferson,  and  thus  square  political  accounts 
with  the  great  Democrat  who  was  their  maximum 
and  magnified  antipathy.  The  temper  of  the  times 
ran  strong  on  both  sides  of  the  political  equation. 
If  the  Federalists  had  pursued  this  reckless  purpose 
they  would  have  precipitated  two-fold  menace: 
first,  the  probability  of  open,  popular  revolt  by  the 
partisans  of  the  candidate  who  was  clearly  the 
country's  electoral  choice;  second,  the  probability 
of  national  disintegration  under  the  presidential 
auspices  of  an  intriguing,  seditionary  charlatan. 
Just  one  force  and  influence  stayed  this  dual  catas 
trophe — the  towering,  political  integrity  of  Alex 
ander  Hamilton,  who  refused  to  soil  his  hands 
upon  a  thieving  conspiracy,  who  stood  like  the 
rock  of  ages  against  such  electoral  debauchery, 
who  whipped  his  partisans  into  obedience  to  com- 

320 


Greatest  American 

mon  sense  and  decency,  and  who  insisted  that  the 
crowning  honors  of  the  nation  should  be  bestowed 
upon  his  arch  political  enemy.  Whatever  the 
measure  of  Tilden's  service  in  1876,  it  is  out 
matched  by  Hamilton's  in  1800.  To  political  in 
tegrity  and  unselfishness,  there  is  no  greater  monu 
ment  in  the  life  of  any  American  who  ever  lived. 
Indeed,  it  is  the  judgment  of  as  profound  a  scholar 
as  Lord  Bryce z  that  Hamilton's  assassination  four 
years  later  may  be  traced  back  to  this  occasion. 
Says  Bryce:  " Hamilton's  influence  at  last  induced 
the  Federalist  members  to  vote  for  Jefferson 
as  a  person  less  dangerous  to  the  country  than 
Burr.  His  action — highly  patriotic,  for  Jefferson 
was  his  bitter  enemy — cost  him  his  life  at  Burr's 
hands."  Thus,  even  in  the  unique  circumstance 
presented  by  Tilden's  claims  on  primal  fame, 
Hamilton  again  proves  credentials  that  are  all- 
inclusive. 

John  Marshall,  Chief  Justice  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  from  January  31,  1801, 
to  his  death  on  July  6,  1835,  belongs  high  up  on 
any  American  scroll  of  fame.  His  reports,  filling 
some  thirty  invaluable  volumes,  are  cherished  and 
imperishable  expositions  of  American  Constitu- 

1  The  American  Commonwealth,  by  Lord  Bryce. 

321 


(greatest  American 

tional  law.  Yet,  once  again,  Hamilton  displays 
paralleling  talents.  Because  of  his  vast  legal 
learning  and  capacity,  he  was  repeatedly  urged  as 
eligible  for  the  exact  position  which  Marshall  filled ; 
and  every  reliable  authority  corroborates  the  opin 
ion  that  if  he  had  taken  it,  abjuring  the  other 
multitudinous  pursuits  which  taxed  his  busy  life 
with  almost  unbelievable  responsibilities,  he  would 
have  been  no  less  a  decoration  to  the  bench  than 
was  the  great  Marshall  himself.  Indeed,  Hamil 
ton's  pioneering  creation  of  the  doctrine  of  "im 
plied  powers "•  —  "the  most  formidable  weapon 
in  the  armory  of  the  Constitution,"  as  has  been 
said — was  decidedly  more  of  an  original  credit 
to  him,  under  the  inceptive  circumstances  sur 
rounding  its  courageous  promulgation,  than  to 
Marshall,  who  in  subsequent  decisions  merely 
gave  it  the  authority  of  law;  and  such  exhibits, 
while  detracting  nothing  from  Marshall's  stature, 
must  be  conceded  to  put  Hamilton  into  possession 
of  pre-eminent  qualities  in  this  field  as  in  all 
others.  /So  far  as  the  Constitution,  its  establish 
ment,  its  interpretation  and  its  stabilization  are 
concerned,  whether  gauged  as  a  matter  of  philoso 
phy  or  jurisprudence,  Hamilton  needs  yield  prece 
dence  to  no  man.  "In  the  end,"  wrote  a  friendly 

322 


(greatest  American 


biographer  in  1  856,  x  '  '  the  predilections  of  this  great 
man  and  profound  statesman  were  fully  realized. 
The  Constitution,  which  he  chiefly  elaborated, 
was  finally  adopted;  and  has  since  become  the  sub 
ject  of  constant  eulogy  of  myriads  of  eloquent 
tongues,  and  has  received  the  admiration  of  the 
whole  civilized  world.  The  merit  of  Hamilton  in 
connection  with  it  can  now  scarcely  be  estimated; 
but  when  a  thousand  years  of  unequaled  national 
prosperity  and  glory  shall  have  rolled  over  this 
confederacy,  which  his  great  plastic  hand  moulded 
into  so  compact,  so  beautiful,  and  so  consistent  a 
mass  ;  when  five  hundred  millions  of  human  beings 
shall  inhabit  this  continent,  turning  by  their  thrifty 
industry  all  her  boundless  plains  and  valleys  into 
blooming  and  fruitful  gardens;  and  when,  from  the 
Atlantic  to  the  Pacific  shore  an  empire  of  freemen 
shall  here  live  and  reign  under  the  benign  control 
of  that  Constitution,  being  ten  times  greater  than 
any  previous  empire  that  ever  existed  on  earth; 
then,  indeed,  may  the  vast  services  and  the  vener 
able  name  of  Alexander  Hamilton  be  cherished 
with  the  profound  reverence  and  the  high  appre 
ciation  which  they  abundantly  deserve.** 

1  The  Life  and  Times  of  Alexander  Hamilton,  by  Samuel 
Schmucker. 

323 


Greatest  American 


It  is  scarcely  possible  to  name  any  man  eligible, 
however  remotely,  to  classification  among  great 
Americans  without  rinding  his  essential  achieve 
ments  —  whatever  happens  to  be  the  true  trade 
mark  on  his  fame  —  strikingly  matched,  in  some 
degree,  in  Hamilton's  fertile  career,  because  it  is 
scarcely  possible  to  name  an  essential  field  of  use 
ful  action  wherein  Hamilton  did  not  wear  epaulets. 
The  analyses  we  have  applied  to  a  few,  apply 
equally  to  the  many.  Hamilton  was  more  nearly 
omniscient  than  any  other  American  who  ever 
lived.  More  American  policies  and  more  Ameri 
can  institutions  trace  parentage  to  him  than  to 
any  other  mortal.  If  John  Ruskin  was  right  when 
he  declared  "greatness  is  the  aggregation  of 
minuteness,"  Hamilton  was  great  in  a  superlative 
degree.  An  index,  confined  exclusively  to  those 
agencies  and  charts  of  government  for  which  he 
was  the  original  sponsor  as  detailed  in  the  preced 
ing  pages  of  this  chronicle,  would  touch  the  funda 
ments  of  every  department  of  public  service,  and 
almost  every  phase  of  foreign  and  domestic  rela 
tions.  President  Nicholas  Murray  Butler  of 
Columbia  University  has  said:1  "He  represented 
the  highest  type  of  human  product,  a  great  intel- 

1  Title-page  of  The  Conqueror,  by  Gertrude  Atherton. 

324 


(greatest  American 


lect  driven  for  high  purposes  by  an  imperious  will." 
The  scope  and  diversity  of  these  purposes  and 
their  fruits  comprise  his  unapproachable  title  to 
pre-eminent  American  consideration.  It  does 
not  justly  suffice  to  say  that  this  describes  merely 
our  greatest  constructive  statesman,  as  is  the  ver 
dict  of  some  commentators  who  acknowledge  Ham 
ilton's  qualities,  but  delimit  their  latitude.  Far 
beyond  such  political  confines  is  the  genius  of  the 
greatest  or^orT  the  greatest  writer,  the  ^greatest 
lawyer  of  his  time.  This_spgllsculture,  not  states 
manship.  Far  beyond  any  analytical  confines  at 
all  is  the  inestimable  influence  in  behalf  of  success 
ful  Revolution  which  he  flung  into  the  Republic's 
pre-natal  era,  and  in  behalf  of  stabilized  and 
ordered  Government  which  became  the  post- 
Revolutionary  era's  saving  grace.  This  is  more 
than  culture  and  statesmanship  combined:  it  is 
supreme  personality.  The  Army  gives  him  a  dash 
of  the  cavalier.  The  tremendous  odds  against 
which  he  won  his  major  triumphs  —  opposition 
which  avoided  no  extremes  in  scurrility  and  per 
sonal  vituperation  —  bring  him  into  sympathetic 
concert  with  the  greatest  of  our  leaders,  all  of  whom 
invariably  have  suffered  similar  vicissitudes.  "His 
fearlessness,  openness  and  directness  turned  rivals 

325 


(Greatest  American 

into  enemies,  irritated  smaller  men,  and  aroused 
their  malicious  desire  to  pull  him  down."1  Last 
but  not  least,  if  "The  Greatest  American "  must 
have  lived  a  colorful  drama  in  order  to  complete 
the  finest  composite  picture  of  his  race,  Hamilton 
was  a  penniless  orphan  at  tender  eleven;  a  self- 
made  master  of  his  country's  destinies  at  brilliant 
thirty-two;  an  assassinated  martyr  to  national 
fidelities  at  supernal  forty-seven.  The  whole 
picture  is  without  a  peer. 

It  is  this  composite  greatness  that  should  govern 
in  pursuit  of  our  maximum  American  type.  Paren 
thetically,  a  parallel  might  be  drawn  from  the 
heroisms  that  we  venerate  in  the  story  of  American 
participation  in  The  Great  War.  "The  Greatest 
Hero"  is  the  unknown  martyr  whom  it  is  proposed 
to  bring  from  among  the  unidentified  American 
dead  in  France  and  bury  in  Arlington  National 
Cemetery  with  the  highest  honors  the  Republic 
can  bestow — just  as  England  buried  an  unknown 
" Tommy"  in  Westminster  Abbey  amid  Britain's 
great — just  as  France  buried  an  unknown  "Poilu" 
beneath  the  historic  Arc  de  Triomphe.  He  is  our 
"Greatest  Hero"  because  he  is  composite.  No- 

1  Alexander  Hamilton,  by  Professor  Wiliam  Graham 
Sumner. 

326 


(greatest  American 

body  will  know — nobody  will  care — whether  he 
be  from  Maine  or  Michigan,  from  Florida  or  Ore 
gon;  whether  boy  or  man;  whether  white  or  black; 
whether  Jew  or  Gentile;  whether  native-born  or 
naturalized  alien;  whether  Catholic  or  Protestant 
or  neither;  whether  of  one  political  party  or  an 
other.  He  will  be  The  American  Patriot.  Of 
that  we  shall  be  sure.  So  far  as  these  other  char 
acters  are  concerned,  he  can  fit  any  of  these  various 
alternative  roles  equally  well.  Any  of  us  can  think 
of  him  in  whatever  terms  best  suits  our  fancy.  In 
other  words,  it  is  the  composite  character  he  repre 
sents  that  builds  him  into  the  most  typically 
superb  example  of  American  sacrifice  and  Ameri 
can  democracy.  If  he  were  less  composite,  he 
would  be  less  typical.  Possibly  this  reasoning 
argues  most  strongly  in  favor  of  the  contention 
that  "The  Greatest  American"  should  be  an  ideal 
istic  figure,  rather  than  a  definite  personality. 
But,  from  the  viewpoint  of  this  volume's  analysis, 
it  thunders  in  support  of  the  proposition  that,  if 
we  are  academically  to  choose  one  "Greatest 
American/'  he  should  be  that  American  whose 
talents  and  capacities  and  services  to  his  country 
are  most  nearly  the  composite  of  all  talents  and 
capacities  and  services.  It  is  on  this  score  that 

327 


(greatest  American 

Alexander  Hamilton  defies  successful  competition. 

Some  sophists  have  said  that  Hamilton  was  not 
an  American  at  all,  because  he  was  born  in  the 
West  Indies.  The  answer  is  that  there  were  no 
Americans,  in  the  modern  and  proper  usage  of  the 
word,  until  after  the  Republic  was  established. 
The  best  possible  proof  is  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States  which  prohibits  the  Presidency  to 
any  person  "except  a  natural  born  citizen,  or  a 
citizen  of  the  United  States  at  the  time  of  the  adoption 
of  this  Constitution"1  Hamilton  was  eligible  to 
the  Presidency.  He  was  as  thoroughly  the  product 
of  our  soil  and  our  environment  as  Washington 
himself.  To  rule  him  out  would  be  the  culminating 
futility  in  jealous  ingratitude. 

Another  viewpoint  deals  primarily  with  the 
relative  importance  of  epochs,  insisting  that  "The 
Greatest  American"  must  have  served  the  greatest 
relative  era  in  our  history.  This  resolves  itself 
usually  into  an  argument  between  the  relative  im 
portance  of  the  Washingtonian  and  the  Lincolnian 
periods.  Hamilton's  advocate  may  well  welcome 
such  an  argument  with  avidity.  Creation  is  a 
greater  task  than  preservation.  If  the  flood  wall 
that  protects  a  great  city  is  swept  away  by  the 

1  Article  2 ,  Section  I . 

328 


(greatest  American 

invasion  of  a  relentless  sea,  it  is  a  tremendous  task 
—a  task  of  inestimable  burden  and  importance — 
to  rebuild  the  wall.  But  it  is  not  so  great  a  task 
as  was  the  wall's  original  construction.  The 
pioneering  has  been  done.  Courageous  foresight 
has  demonstrated  the  feasibility  of  the  plan.  It 
has  been  proven  that  the  plan  will  "work."  The 
foundations  are  down.  The  long  habit  of  living 
behind  the  flood  wall  has  accustomed  the  people 
to  respect  a  flood  wall,  despite  its  temporary 
breach,  and  to  desire  and  to  require  its  perpetua 
tion.  The  value  of  a  flood  wall  has  been  demon 
strated.  Indeed,  the  very  catastrophe  which 
either  impends  or  happens  when  the  wall  gives  way 
in  any  sector  emphasizes  the  need  for  the  wall  and 
creates  a  common  instinct  for  its  preservation. 
These  factors  were  absent  when  the  first  creator  of 
the  wall  faced  a  dominant  sea  upon  one  side,  and 
a  skeptical,  disorganized  and  fearful  people  upon 
the  other  side.  The  first  creator  of  the  wall  had  to 
conquer  both  a  menace  and  the  thing  menaced. 
For  him  there  were  no  land-marks,  no  precedents, 
no  charts,  no  foundations.  His  is  the  greater 
labor  not  only  because  it  is  the  original  labor,  but 
also  because  it  sets  the  mold  for  all  labor  there 
after.  The  power  that  creates  would  manifestly 

329 


(greatest  American 


possess  the  power  to  preserve.  But  the  power  that 
preserves  might  lack  the  power  to  create.  Changing 
the  metaphor,  we  who  can  cultivate  a  field  of  wheat 
cannot  make  so  much  as  one  single  blade  of  grass. 
There  is  nothing  greater  than  creation. 

Bring  these  similes  home  to  our  specific  subject. 
The  case  may  be  rested  upon  the  testimony  of 
Theodore  Roosevelt.1  After  putting  Washington 
above  all  other  Americans,  with  specific  reference 
to  Lincoln  who,  said  he  "alone  is  entitled  even  to 
stand  second,"  Roosevelt  argued  the  preferential 
importance  of  the  Revolutionary  era  by  a  com 
parison  of  estimate  upon  the  work  of  other  great 
men  whom  we  see  in  a  perspective  free  from  legend 
ary  distortion.  "The  truth  is,"  wrote  Roosevelt, 
"that  in  1776,  our  main  task  was  to  shape  new 
political  conditions,  and  then  to  reconcile  our 
people  to  them;  whereas,  in  1860,  we  had  merely  to 
fight  fiercely  for  the  preservation  of  what  was 
already  ours.  .  .  .  Franklin,  Hamilton,  Jeffer 
son,  Adams  and  their  fellows  most  surely  stand 
far  above  Seward,  Sumner,  Chase,  Stanton  and 
Stevens,  great  as  were  the  services  which  these, 
and  those  like  them,  rendered."  This  is  the  argu 
ment  of  the  flood  wall  and  the  grain  translated  into 

1  Roosevelt's  Life  of  Gouverneur  Morris. 

330 


<§reate#t  American 

terms  of  American  history.  Says  another  his 
torian:1  "When  the  new  Government  was  set  in 
motion  under  the  Presidency  of  Washington,  with 
Hamilton,  the  typical  Federalist,  as  the  organiz 
ing  statesman,  .  .  .  this  country  was  inferior  in 
population  and  wealth  to  Holland;  it  stood  but 
little  above  the  level  of  Denmark  or  Portugal." 
Surely,  as  Roosevelt  has  said,  the  creation  of  the 
United  States  of  America  amid  such  conditions, 
must  be  admitted  to  have  been  a  greater  miracle 
than  the  preservation  of  its  natural  and  habitual 
Union  three-quarters  of  a  century  later.  Having 
once  resolved  this  equation — not,  pray,  with  the 
remotest  thought  of  disparaging  the  stupendous 
inspiration  and  service  of  the  saintly  Lincoln  and 
his  time,  but  rather  merely  to  recall  modern 
America  to  a  clearer  vision  of  its  debt  to  men  and 
days  more  readily  ignored  because  more  remote — 
the  balance  of  the  analysis  loses  most  of  its  com 
plexity.  All  things  considered,  with  an  eye  to 
diversity  of  talents,  service  and  appeal,  Alexander 
Hamilton  was  the  "colossus"  of  his  time,  as  even 
Jefferson  explicitly  acknowledged.  '/His  extra 
ordinary  genius,  knowledge  and  activity  would 

1  Hannis  Taylor  in  The  Origin  and  Growth  of  the  American 
Constitution. 

331 


(greatest  Smencan 

have  made  him  illustrious  in  any  society,  but  his 
character  was  in  some  respects  beyond  the  grasp  of 
common  minds.  .  .  .  He  is  to  be  regarded  above 
all  other  men  as  the  creator  of  the  institutions  of 
modern  liberty."1  " Among  the  founders  of  the 
American  nation,  Alexander  Hamilton  deserves  a 
place  of  honor  beside  the  immortal  Washington," 
declares  Prof.  Payson  J.  Treat,  head  of  the  His 
tory  Department  at  Stanford  University,  Cali 
fornia.  "In  intellectual  brilliancy  and  construc 
tive  genius  he  surpassed  his  fellow-workers.  His 
services  in  securing  the  adoption  of  the  Constitu 
tion  and  in  building  up  a  strong  Federal  Gov 
ernment  have  rarely  been  adequately  recog 
nized." 

When  Prof.  E.  E.  Robinson,  co-worker  with 
Treat  at  Stanford,  was  asked  the  question,  "Whom 
do  you  consider  the  greatest  figure  in  the  formative 
period  of  the  Nation,"  his  prompt  reply  was 
"Hamilton." 

There  are,  of  course,  as  many  different  methods 
of  measuring  the  quality  of  greatness  in  human 
leadership  as  there  are  minds  to  think  them  out. 
In  Robert  W.  McLaughlin's  illuminating  study  of 

1  American  Society  in  the  Days  of  Washington,  by  Rufus 
Wilmot  Griswold,  1855. 

332 


(greatest  American 


relative  characters  of  Washington  and  Lincoln,1 
the  author  says:  "Where  the  word  'great'  is  used 
of  the  few  exceptional  leaders  in  government,  it 
has  either  of  two  meanings.  It  may  mean  the  pos 
session  of  some  traits  so  in  excess  of  those  possessed 
by  the  ordinary  man,  as  to  cause  all  men  to  look 
with  fear  or  admiration  upon  the  one  possessing 
them.  Or  it  may  mean  the  possession  of  traits  in 
such  perfect  proportion,  that  the  one  possessing 
them,  because  he  is  normal,  is  great.  The  great 
man,  in  the  first  use  of  the  word,  startles  the  world. 
In  the  second  use  of  the  word,  he  wins  the  world." 

Hamilton's  greatness  squared  with  both  these 
calculations.  /He  possessed  traits  far  in  excess  of 
average  human  endowment,  as  testified  by  count 
less  achievements  which  history  acknowledges  to 
have  been  prodigious;  equally,  he  possessed  these 
traits  in  perfect  proportion,  as  testified  by  his  un 
paralleled  versatility  in  law,  legislation  and  litera 
ture  whether  as  statesman,  soldier  or  scholar,  be 
the  occasion  war  or  peace.  That  he  inspired  either 
fear  or  admiration  —  with  no  middle  ground  —  is 
proven,  on  the  one  hand,  by  historically  demon 
strated  attachments  which  were  fanatical  in  their 
love  and  trust,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  historically 

1  McLaughlin's  Washington  and  Lincoln. 

333 


BDfje  (greatest  Smencan 

demonstrated  antipathies  which  made  him,  next 
to  Washington,  the  most  venomously  maligned 
man  of  his  time.  Quoting  again  from  Griswold, 
who  lived  among  men  who  personally  knew  Ham 
ilton  and  his  era:1  'pie  inspired  his  friends  with 
the  warmest  personal  attachment,  while  he  rarely, 
if  ever,  failed  to  make  his  enemies  both  hate  and 
fear  him/'  ) 

Certainly;  he  both  "startled"  and  "won"  the 
world.  Witness,  for  typical  example,  the  tribute 
of  Talleyrand,  who,  whatever  may  have  been  his 
shortcomings,  was  the  greatest  world  diplomat  of 
his  day.  Said  this  astute  and  learned  Frenchman: 
"I  consider  Napoleon,  Fox  and  Hamilton  the  three 
greatest  men  of  our  time,  and  if  I  had  to  choose 
between  the  three,  I  would  give  without  hesitation 
the  first  place  to  Hamilton."2  Or  take  a  modern 
Briton's  view.  Says  the  essayist,  Oliver:  "In  the 
great  rebellion,  Washington  was  the  master  spirit. 
In  the  great  struggle  to  prevent  the  breaking  of 
the  Union,  Lincoln  was  the  master  spirit.  In  his 
fitness  for  the  particular  crisis,  Hamilton  was  the 
equal  of  these  men,  and  it  would  be  hard  to  find 

1  American  Society  in  the  Days  of  Washington,  by  Rufus 
Wilmot  Griswold,  1855. 

2  Etudes  Sur  La  Republique. 

334 


fltfje  (greatest  American 

higher  praise.  In  character,  he  was  their  equal; 
in  force  of  will;  in  efficiency;  in  practical  wisdom; 
in  courage  and  in  virtue.  But  in  'a  certain  sense 
his  greatness  surpasses  theirs,  for  it  is  more  uni 
versal  and  touches  the  interest  of  the  whole  world 
in  a  wider  circle.  He  was  great  in  action  which  is 
for  the  moment,  and  in  thought  which  is  for  all 
time;  and  he  was  great  not  merely  as  a  minister  of 
State,  but  as  a  man  of  letters.  In  constancy,  it  is 
customary  to  compare  him  with  the  younger  Pitt, 
who  was  his  contemporary.  In  political  foresight 
and  penetration,  it  is  no  extravagance  to  place  him 
by  the  side  of  Burke.  He  shares  with  Fox  his 
astounding  genius  for  friendship."1 

If  "startling"  and  " winning"  the  world  be  the 
rule  to  measure  greatness,  Hamilton  qualifies  with 
out  a  reservation.  But,  says  McLaughlin :  "There 
is  a  simplicity  that  is  elemental,  and  has  to  do  with 
the  roots  of  character.  Some  one  has  said  of 
Fenelon,  'Half  of  him  would  be  a  great  man  and 
stand  out  more  clearly  as  a  great  man,  than  does 
the  whole,  because  it  would  be  simpler.'  And 
these  words,  so  pregnant  with  meaning,  explain 
the  failure  of  some  great  men  to  attain  the  rank  of 
supreme  greatness.  Sometimes  this  lack  of  sim- 

1  Alexander  Hamilton,  by  Oliver. 

335 


(greatest  American 

plicity  is  moral,  again  it  is  mental.  Alexander 
Hamilton  in. sheer  intellectual  strength  exerted  in 
behalf  of  Government  is  without  a  peer  in  our  his 
tory.  But  it  is  this  half  of  him  that  stands  out 
more  clearly  as  a  great  man." 

Unquestionably,  intellectuality  did  thus  domi 
nate  Hamilton's  character.  But  it  is  poor  ac 
knowledgment  of  his  moral  strength  to  ignore  the 
superb  unselfishness  with  which  he  put  aside  every 
private  concern  and  devoted  his  whole  life  to  his 
country,  to  his  own  embarrassing  impoverishment. 
Even  Madison,  his  ultimate  political  foe,  conceded 
this  point  in  1831  r1  ''That  he  possessed  intellectual 
powers  of  the  first  order,  and  the  moral  qualifica 
tions  of  integrity  and  honor  in  a  captivating  de 
gree,  has  been  decreed  to  him  by  a  suffrage  now 
universal." 

"It  was  the  absence  of  moral  simplicity  in  Hamil 
ton,"  continues  McLaughlin,  "  which  involved  an 
appearance  for  a  time  unlike  reality,  which  justi 
fied  the  suspicion  of  his  enemies."  On  the  con 
trary,  the  suspicions  of  his  enemies  were  never 
justified;  and  never  did  they  hazard  an  occasional 
challenge  to  the  purity  of  his  motives  and  the 
probity  of  his  record,  but  they  were  overwhelmed 

1  Letters  and  Other  Writings  of  James  Madison. 

336 


<§reate£t  American 


with  prompt  and  unanswerable  proofs  of  public  recti 
tude.  Witness  Giles  with  his  luckless  resolutions  of 
censure  in  the  early  Congress  —  driven  to  humiliating 
defeat.  Witness  Freneau's  discomfiture  in  his 
scandalous  National  Gazette,  and  Callender's  hap 
less  boomerangs  flung  at  Hamilton's  steel  integrity. 
It  cannot  be  said  that  any  ''half  of  him  stands 
out  more  clearly  as  a  great  man."  If  he  were  to 
be  academically  dissected,  it  could  not  be  into 
"halves/'  It  would  be  into  fifths  or  tenths  or 
twentieths,  because  no  less  a  division  could  catalog 
his  multanimous  talents  and  characters  and  r61es 
and  contributions  to  society  and  to  mankind.  It 
is  this  very  diversity  of  genius,  this  supreme  mas 
tery  of  so  many  divergent  arts  and  actions,  this 
very  inability  to  "halve"  the  man,  as  has  been 
said  repeatedly  before,  that  fits  him  to  a  proper 
measure  of  pre-eminence.  As  for  the  key-virtue 
of  "goodness,"  if,  as  McLaughlin  says,  it  com 
prehends,  in  addition  to  these  other  things,  "sin 
cerity"  and  "faith,"  it  may  well  be  asked  whether 
"sincerity"  could  have  had  severer  test  than  in 
Hamilton's  expositions  of  the  Constitution,  or 
"faith"  a  greater  demonstration  than  in  Hamil 
ton's  sublime  belief  in  the  destinies  of  the  Gov 
ernment  he  helped  to  found? 

337 


(greatest  American 

No  matter  by  what  rule  Hamilton's  memory 
shall  be  tried,  his  title  to  pre-eminent  claim  upon 
American  veneration  can  be  verified.  Schmucker 
wrote  in  1856:'  "The  remarkable  incidents  of 
Hamilton's  career  will  never  lose  their  singular 
power  to  attract  and  instruct  mankind,  for  they 
furnish  impressive  illustrations  both  of  the  bright 
est  and  the  basest  elements  of  human  character. 
The  brightest  all  appertained  to  himself ;  the  basest 
belonged  to  those  by  whom  he  was  surrounded  and 
assailed.  Few  men  have  ever  lived  whose  virtues 
were  so  transcendent,  whose  motives  were  so  dis 
interested,  whose  usefulness  was  so  extensive  and 
so  permanent ;  yet  there  never  lived  a  man  against 
whom  the  envious,  the  malicious  and  the  vile, 
fabricated  so  many  baseless  and  absurd  slanders, 
and  illustrated  by  the  aspersions  which  they  cast 
upon  him,  and  by  the  filthy  slime  of  their  hate 
with  which  they  endeavored  to  pollute  him,  how 
despicable  humanity  in  their  own  persons  could 
become.  To  a  very  eminent  degree  Hamilton  paid 
the  natural  penalty  which  superior  genius  and 
distinction  must  always  suffer  from  the  envious, 
the  disappointed,  and  the  obscure.  .  .  .  The 

1  The  Life  and  Times  of  Alexander  Hamilton,  by  Samuel 
M.  Schmucker. 

338 


(greatest  Smerkan 


name  and  fame  of  Hamilton  will  not  die,  until  that 
dark  day  shall  come  when  the  name  and  fame  of 
Washington  will  also  be  remembered  no  more." 

Modern  American  generations  have  come  dan 
gerously  near  an  historical  neglect  which  would 
have  most  pleased  these  who,  in  his  day, 
maltreated  their  presiding  genius. 

The  compensations  of  gratitude  which  we  have 
liberally  bestowed  upon  others,  we  have  too  grudg 
ingly  withheld  from  him.  For  example,  our  na 
tional  Capitol  bristles  with  statues  and  memorials 
to  great  Americans  for  whom  we  thus  acknowledge 
a  perpetual  love  and  respect.  America's  friends 
from  foreign  shores  —  Lafayette,  Rochambeau, 
Kosciuszko,  Pulaski,  Von  Steuben  —  all  are  there; 
and  all  of  them,  if  some  black  magic  could  endow 
them  with  an  hour  of  life,  would  look  about  for 
Hamilton  —  and  look  in  vain.  Washington,  Lin 
coln,  Jackson,  Sherman,  Scott,  Webster,  McPher- 
son,  Thomas,  McClellan,  Sheridan,  Dupont, 
Farragut,  Witherspoon,  Logan,  Hancock,  Rawlins, 
Franklin,  Jones,  Barry,  Marshall,  Garfield,  Grant, 
Greene  —  all  these,  and  many  more,  are  immortal 
ized.  But  nowhere  is  there  statue  or  memorial 
to  Hamilton,  the  peer  of,  if  not  superior  to,  them 
all  in  diversity  of  indispensable  service  to  the 

339 


<Sreate£t  American 

Republic  into  which  he  wove  the  fabric  of  his  soul. 

Happily  this  omission  is  now  on  its  way  to  recti 
fication.  On  June  3,  1917,  the  following  official 
self-explanatory  statement  was  issued  from  the 
Treasury  Department: 

"Secretary  McAdoo  today  announced  that  a 
patriotic  American  woman  of  New  York  had 
offered  to  present  to  the  people  of  the  United 
States  a  statue  of  Alexander  Hamilton  to  be  erected 
in  the  city  of  Washington.  This  will  be  the  first 
memorial  in  the  national  Capitol  to  the  first 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury. 

"The  donor  is  an  intense  admirer  of  Hamilton 
and  the  greatness,  genius  and  statesmanship  with 
which  he  served  the  Republic  during  its  formative 
days.  Secretary  McAdoo  was  very  anxious  to 
make  public  the  name  of  the  donor,  in  order  that 
the  people  of  the  country  might  know  of  her  gener 
ous  and  patriotic  spirit,  but  as  the  gift  was  made 
in  honor  of  Hamilton,  she  desired  that  fact  to 
stand  alone  and  not  to  mingle  with  it  any  credit 
to  herself.  The  Secretary  regrets  that  he  is  un 
able  to  reveal  the  name  of  the  noble  woman  who 
has  made  this  splendid  gift  to  the  nation. 

"The  sculptor  selected  is  J.  E.  Fraser,  who  de 
signed  the  five-cent  coin  now  in  circulation. 

340 


Model  of  the  Hamilton  Statue  to  be  placed  on  the  Treasury 
Plaza,  Washington 


Greatest  American 


Mr.  Fraser  was  chosen  by  the  donor  and  is  about 
to  begin  work  on  the  memorial. 

"The  statue  will  be  erected  on  the  south  plaza 
of  the  Treasury  Department.  The  site  was 
selected  by  Secretary  McAdoo  and  approved  by 
the  Fine  Arts  Commission.  The  Treasury  Plaza 
was  selected  as  the  most  appropriate  location  for 
the  statue,  because  among  Hamilton's  many  ser 
vices  to  the  nation,  those  rendered  in  respect  to 
the  fiscal  system  were  both  conspicuous  and  en 
during.  For  that  reason  the  Treasury  site  is 
regarded  as  singularly  fitting. 

"For  years  an  attempt  has  been  made  to  erect 
a  memorial  to  Hamilton,  but  without  result.  By 
Joint  Resolution  approved  March  4,  1909,  Congress 
appropriated  $10,000  for  the  preparation  of  a  site, 
and  the  erection  of  a  pedestal  upon  which  to  place 
a  memorial  to  be  erected  by  the  Alexander  Hamil 
ton  National  Memorial  Association.  This  organi 
zation  for  several  years  has  been  endeavoring  to 
collect  funds  with  which  to  erect  the  statue,  and 
has  collected  six  or  seven  thousand  dollars  for  that 
purpose.  It  is  the  intention  to  utilize  the  Con 
gressional  appropriation  and  the  collections  of  the 
Alexander  Hamilton  Memorial  Association  to  pre 
pare  the  site  and  erect  the  pedestal  upon  which 


<©reate$t  American 

the  statue  donated  will  be  placed.  The  donor  of 
the  statue  did  not  know  of  the  plans  of  the  Alex 
ander  Hamilton  Memorial  Association  when  she 
proposed  the  gift,  and  desiring  to  present  the  com 
plete  statue,  accepted  the  suggestion  that  the  Con 
gressional  appropriation  and  the  funds  of  the 
Association  be  used  for  the  preparation  of  the  site 
and  pedestal.  She  will  give  the  statue  in  its 
entirety." 

Thus,  through  the  gift  of  a  patriotic  woman, 
whose  identity  the  Treasury  Department  continues 
to  refuse  to  disclose,  but  whose  historical  judgments 
are  vindicated  by  her  generosities,  some  visual  re 
minder  of  Hamilton  at  last  is  to  rise  in  the  Capitol 
City  for  the  location  of  which,  upon  the  banks  of 
the  Potomac,  he  was  essentially  responsible:  and 
thus  the  long-sustained  ambitions  and  fidelities  of 
The  Alexander  Hamilton  National  Memorial  Asso 
ciation  will  shortly  reach  deserved  fruition.  At  a 
meeting,  December  30,  1918,  in  the  office  of  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  the  President  of  the 
Alexander  Hamilton  National  Memorial  Associa 
tion,  Mr.  Justice  Josiah  A.  Van  Ordsel  of  the  Dis 
trict  of  Columbia  Court  of  Appeals,  reported  upon 
the  condition  of  the  fund  which  his  organization 
had  been  collecting  through  the  years,  and  the 

342 


(Greatest  American 

Commission,  created  by  Act  of  Congress,1  ap 
proved  general  plans  for  the  project.  The  sculptor 
is  James  Earle  Fraser  of  New  York,  who  has  done, 
among  other  important  works,  the  Roosevelt  bust 
in  the  Senate  Chamber  in  Washington,  the  monu 
ment  to  John  Hay  in  Cleveland,  and  the  monument 
to  Bishop  Potter  in  the  Cathedral  of  St.  John  The 
Divine,  New  York  City.  Mr.  Fraser  has  selected 
Henry  Bacon,  New  York,  architect  of  the  Lincoln 
Memorial  in  Washington,  to  design  the  pedestal. 

Appropriately,  this  statue  will  rise  from  the 
plaza  of  the  Treasury  Department,  from  whose 
archives  all  original  Hamiltonian  documents  have 
disappeared  as  a  result  of  fire  in  1833,  but  in  whose 
fabric  the  whole  Hamiltonian  genius  stands  for 
ever  as  the  basic  design.  That  it  could  be  set,  no 
less  appropriately,  in  almost  any  other  Depart 
ment — because  his  works  blessed  every  phase  of 
the  country's  activities — suggests  the  gamut  of  his 
contributions  to  mankind.  It  will  look  out  upon  a 
nation  which  basks  in  the  culmination  of  his  fond 
est  hopes,  and  which,  in  a  people's  life,  liberty  and 
pursuit  of  happiness,  passes  not  a  single  day  with 
out  leaning  upon  some  beneficent  advantage  that 
traces  straight  back  to  him  for  source.  To  those 

1  Stat.  L.,  Vol.  35,  page  1170. 

343 


(greatest  American 

who  approach  it  with  seeing  eyes,  it  will  be  a  thing 
of  changing  r61es  and  moods — now  an  implacable 
soldier,  alight  with  the  intrepidity  of  Monmouth 
Court  House  and  Yorktown's  flashing  valor — 
now  a  decisive  statesman,  ordering  the  composite 
destinies  of  a  new  civilization — now  a  vivid  orator, 
bending  hostile  majorities  to  his  crystal  aims  and 
imperious  will — now  a  brilliant  scholar,  dominat 
ing  the  constructive  culture  of  his  time — now  a 
courageous  advocate,  daring  for  the  right  with 
nimble,  trenchant  pen — now  the  masterful  lawyer, 
leading  his  profession — now  the  architect  and  mas 
ter  builder  of  the  Union,  with  human  liberty  upon 
his  trestle  board — now  the  Vigilante,  defending 
the  Constitution  with  immutable  tenacity — now 
the  founder  of  the  public  credit — now  the  first  re 
liance  of  George  Washington,  from  the  Battle  of 
Long  Island  to  the  ''Farewell  Address" — now  the 
sage  economist,  no  less  omniscient  in  commerce 
than  in  the  arts — now  the  stricken  martyr,  sacri 
ficed  to  his  ideals,  and  mourned  with  universal, 
soul-deep  griefs — always,  the  spotless  patriot, 
dedicated  with  unselfish  singleness  of  purpose  to 
the  progressive  welfare  of  the  people  and  the 
institutions  of  the  United  States. 
Such,  all  things  considered,  was  "The  Greatest 

344 


(greatest  American 


American/'  His  real  monument  is  neither  a 
statue  in  his  nation's  Capitol  nor  his  modest  tomb 
in  the  metropolis  that  was  his  home.  His  real 
monument  is  The  Republic. 


George  Arliss,  one  of  the  greatest  author-actors 
on  the  modern  American  stage,  has  written  for  this 
volume  its  final  word.  Arliss  is  famed  not  only 
for  his  artistry  in  "Disraeli"  and  "Paganini,"  but 
even  more  particularly  for  his  faithful  and  inspir 
ing  work  in  1917  in  "  Hamilton "-—  which,  with 
Mary  P.  Hamlin,  he  wrote,  and  in  which  he  played 
an  historic  title  r61e.  This  latter  undertaking  is  the 
only  major  effort  ever  made  to  dramatize  the  life  of 
Hamilton.  Its  classical  success  was  a  tribute  alike 
to  the  subject  and  to  its  portrayer.  It  demon 
strated  beyond  perad venture  what  an  epic  "The 
Greatest  American"  lived  in  his  multicolored  ca 
reer.  Keenly  interested  in  every  phase  of  Hamil- 
toniana,  Arliss  promptly  accepted  an  invitation  to 
close  this  symposium. 

"I  always  get  a  pleasant  feeling  of  satisfaction 
when  I  hear  praise  for  Alexander  Hamilton.  It  is 
not  because  I  once  helped  to  write  a  play  about 
him  that  I  consider  him  The  Greatest  American; 

345 


<§reate*t  American 

or  because  I  impersonated  him  on  the  stage.  Those 
incidents  were  the  result  of  my  admiration  of  the 
man. 

"  Hamilton  may  almost  be  said  to  have  been  an 
infant  phenomenon,  for  he  was  under  thirteen 
years  of  age  when  he  was  displaying  amazing  busi 
ness  capacity.  Most  infant  phenomena  cease  to 
be  remarkable  as  soon  as  they  reach  early  man 
hood.  But  Alexander  Hamilton  was  a  phenomenon 
at  every  stage  of  his  life. 

"He  had  all  the  brilliancy  of  genius  combined 
with  an  infinite  capacity  for  taking  pains.  When 
one  reviews  the  mass  of  correspondence  from  his 
own  hand,  with  sheaves  of  matter  on  special  sub 
jects  demanding  the  deepest  thought  and  the  most 
searching  investigation,  one  is  bound  to  wonder 
how  he  even  found  hours  for  sleep. 

"Who  can  name  another  statesman  or  politician 
with  such  capacity  for  bringing  order  out  of  chaos? 
When  Congressmen  and  Senators  were  wrapping 
themselves  in  the  American  Flag  and  shouting  In 
dependence,  it  was  Hamilton  who  realized  that  no 
country  could  be  a  great  power  except  as  its  credit 
was  preserved;  that  its  credit  must  be  good  if  it 
were  to  prosper.  And  so,  he  never  rested  until 
he  had  put  the  country  on  firm  financial  basis  and 

346 


(greatest  American 

had  sounaly  whipped  those  politicians  who  would 
have  repudiated  responsibilities. 

"His  great  outstanding  attribute  that  commands    > 
our  respect  and  affection  was  courage.     Not  the/ 
courage  of  the  blind  egoist  or  the  imperious  poli 
tician,  but  the  courage  which  has  its  roots  in  love 
of  truth  and  of  honorable  dealing.     He  was  The 
Greatest  American  .  '  ' 


The  Greatest  American  gave  himselfJbo^The 
Greatest  Nation  in  the  cycles  of  Time  .  His  Nation 
profligately  ignores  a  priceless  heritage  in  whatever 
cFegree  if  neglects  orTorgets  his  sturdy  contribution 
tarffielageiZI  Jts  jown_.  perpetuated...  stability^  and 
eminence  are  dependent  upon  its  devotion  to  the 
fundamentals  of  which  he  was  supreme  exemplar. 
In  this  present  period  of  flux  and  uncertain  ty— 
this  era  of  reconstruction  and  readjustment  — 
America  -needs,  as  rarely  before,  the  living  spirit 
of  Alexander  Hamilton."  Weneed  "his  immtttable 
loyalty  to  the  Constitution,  his  unswerving  faith  in 
the  Republic,  his  unhyphenated  attachment  to 
-  J  .  '  Am  eTJca^First  .  '  '  We  need  his  incisive  compre 
hension  of  national  requirements,  national  equities, 
national  purposes  and  national  possibilities.  We 

347 


(greatest  American 

need  his  creeds,  his  vision,  his  culture,  his  stead 
fastness,  his  courage.  We  need  his  love  of  honor 
and  of  truth.  We  need  his  counsel  and  his  in 
spiration.  We  need  mass-intimacy  with  all  that 
he  was  and  always  will  be.  No  son  or  daughter 
of  Columbia  can  truly  know  Hamilton  and  not  be 
a  safer,  surer,  prouder  American  citizen.  It  is  as 
President  Harding  declared  upon  the  opening  pages 
of  this  work:  "The  greater  modern  familiar 
ity  with  Hamiltonism  may  become,  the  greater 
will  be  modern  fidelities  to  essential  American 
institutions." 


348 


INDEX 


Abolition;  Franklin  advocates,  63; 
Hamilton  promotes,  305;  Ham 
ilton  compared  with  Lincoln, 

307 

Accounting,    Federal    system   of, 

179 
Adams,  John,   89,  98,    100,    120, 

252;  opinion  of  Hamilton,  75, 

310 

Adams,  John  Quincy,  quoted,  141 
Adams,  Samuel,  58,  304 
Alderman,  E.  A.,  quoted,  37 
Alien  and  Sedition  Acts,  135 
Allen,  Henry,  quoted,  6 
"Americanus"  Essays,  219 
Andrews,  C.  M.,  quoted,  56 
Annapolis  Convention,  84,  114 
Anti- Federalist    Party,    89,    185, 

188,  190 

Arliss,  George,  quoted,  345 
Arnold,  Benedict,  249,  263 
Atherton,  Gertrude,  quoted,  69 
Atherton's  Conqueror,  xiv. 


B 


Baker,  Newton  D.,  quoted,  36 
Battle  of  Long  Island,  243 
Beck,  James  M.,  quoted,  30 
Bell,  H.  M.,  quoted,  9 
Beveridge,  A.  J.,  quoted,  28 
Borah,  W.  E.,  quoted,  47 
Brooks,  S.  D.,  quoted,  43 
Brown,  John,  7 
Bryce,   James,   quoted,   42,   310, 

321 

Burch,  Bishop,  quoted,  10 
Burr,  Aaron,  103,  107,  139,  225, 


Burroughs,  John,  quoted,  24 
Burton,  Marion  L.,  quoted,  8 
Butler,  Nicholas  Murray,  quoted, 
324 


Callender,  attacks  on  Hamilton, 

75,  204,  234,  290,  337 
"Camillus"  Essays,  96,  219 
Cannon,  Joseph  G.,  quoted,  21 
Capper,  Arthur,  quoted,  9 
Chamberlain,  George,  quoted,  32 
Christian  Constitutional  Society, 

137 

Churchill,  Winston,  quoted,  10 
Citizen  Genet,  93,  218 
Clark,  Champ,  quoted,  28 
Clark,  W.  E.,  quoted,  40 
Clinton,  Governor,  115,  116,  124, 

267 

Cobb,  Frank,  quoted,  39 
Cockran,  Bourke,  quoted,  24 
Congressional  Inquiries  into  Ham 
ilton,  90,  190,  337 
Connecticut  ratified  Constitution, 

126 
Constitutional  Convention,   New 

York,  86,  124,  273 
Constitutional  Convention,  Phila 
delphia,    first    proposed,     114; 
meets,  85,  116 
Continental    Congress,    81,    no, 

114,  264 
"  Continentalist ' '  Essays,  1 1 1 , 1 76, 

198,  210 

Coolidge,  Calvin,  quoted,  45 
Cortelyou,  George,  quoted,  44 
Couden,  Henry,  quoted,  14 
Courts,  Integrity  of,  171 
Cox,  James  M.,  quoted,  54 


349 


inliex 


Croswell  Case,  234 
Croucher  Case,  236 
Crowder,  Enoch  H.,  quoted,  9 
Currency  System,  87,  181,  278 
Curtis,  Cyrus  H.  K.,  quoted,  61 


D 


Daniels,  Josephus,  quoted,  35 
Day,  James  R.,  quoted,  14 
Delaware,    Washington    crossing, 

244 
Delaware    ratified     Constitution, 

126 

Denby,  Edwin,  quoted,  22 
Dodge,  Cleveland,  quoted,  38 
Douglas,  Stephen  A.,  52 
Duane,  James,  in,  176 


Edison,  Thomas  A.,  7;  quoted,  8; 

58,62 
Eliot,  Charles  W.,  quoted,  8.  143 


Faunce,  W.  H.  P.,  quoted,  43 
Federalist  Party,  88,  102,  103,  104, 

130,  183 
"Federalist,"  The,  85,   124,   130, 

143,  210,  215,  2l6,  228 

Ferris,  W.  N.,  quoted,  17 
Fess,  S.  D.,  quoted,  18 
Finley,  John  H.,  quoted,  8 
Florida  Acquisition,  132,  257 
Franklin,  Benjamin,  xv,   19,  30, 

42,  50,  58,  61,  68,  203,  262,  315, 

316,  330,  339 

French  Revolution,  92,  133,  218 
Frost,  William  G.,  quoted,  5 


Gage,  Lyman  J.,  quoted,  34 
Galbraith,  F.  W.,  quoted,  29 
Gallatin,  Albert,  203,  312 
Garfield,  James  A.,  46,  142,  293, 

339 

Georgia  ratifies  Constitution,  126 
Gillett,  F.  H.,  quoted,  28 
Gompers,  Samuel,  quoted,  6 


Greene,  General,  243 
Gunsaulus,  F.  W.,  quoted,  8 

H 

Hadley,  Arthur  T.,  quoted,  44 

Hall  of  Fame,  42 

Hamilton,  Alexander;  birth,  74; 
great  student,  76,  148;  first 
literary  effort,  207;  schooling, 
77;  first  public  appearance,  77, 
no,  176;  enlists,  78,  242;  early 
battles,  243;  Military  Secretary 
to  Washington,  79,  245 ;  quarrels 
with  Washington,  250;  mission 
to  Albany,  79,  248;  married,  80; 
first  public  office,  80,  112;  in 
Continental  Congress,  81,  114, 
264;  goes  to  Annapolis  Con 
vention,  84,  114;  sits  in 
Constitutional  Convention  at 
Philadelphia,  85,  116;  writes 
The  Federalist,  85,  124,  143; 
sits  in  New  York  Constitu 
tional  Convention,  86,  124, 
273;  Secretary  of  Treasury,  86, 
178,  276;  Report  on  Public 
Credit,  180;  founds  Federalist 
Party,  88,  130,  contest  with 
Jefferson,  90;  contact  with 
France,  93,  133,  218,  283;  con 
tact  with  England,  94;  puts 
down  "Whiskey  Rebellion,"  95, 
191;  election  of  Adams,  98;  de 
clines  Senate  appointment,  99; 
war  threatened  with  France, 
100;  heads  Army,  101,  253,  259; 
breaks  with  Adams,  104;  helps 
elect  Jefferson,  105;  defeats 
Burr  in  New  York,  106;  duel, 
107,  140;  funeral,  295;  com 
pared  with  Peletiah  Webster, 
xii,  113;  immigrant,  xv,  great 
constructive  genius,  23,  70; 
wrote  Farewell  Address,  220; 
leader  of  bar,  227;  urged  for 
Chief  Justice,  229;  pioneer  in 
education,  268,  279 

Hamilton  College,  278 

Hamilton  Memorial  Association, 
342 

Hammond,  John  Hays,  quoted,  9 


350 


3htbex 


Hammond,  Minister,  94 
Harding,  President,  quoted,  347 
Henry,  Patrick,  262,  304 
Herrick,  Myron  T.,  quoted,  70 
Hibben,  John  G.,  quoted,  8 
Hill,  D.  J.,  quoted,  53 
Hillis,  Newell  Dwight,  quoted,  8 
Hitchcock,  Gilbert  M.,  quoted,  10 
Hoover,  Herbert,  quoted,  201 ;  270 
Hopkins,  E.  G.,  quoted,  14 
"Horatius"  essays,  219 
Ho  well,  Clark,  quoted,  32 
Hutchins,  Harry  B.,  quoted,  9 


Implied  powers  of  Constitution, 

87,  189,  196,  227,  322 
Internal  improvements  at  public 

expense,  87,  196 
Iredell,  Judge,  238 


Jackson,  Andrew,  20,  339 

Jay,  John,  95,  96,  103,  119,  163, 
209,  283 

Jay's  Treaty,  95,  219 

Jefferson,  Thomas,  14,  20,  32,  35, 
38,  39,  42,  44,  54,  58,  89,  90,  91, 
1 02,  103;  opinion  of  Hamilton, 

104;     121,     187,    218,    234,    283, 
290,  310,  320,  330 

Johnson,  Hiram  W.,  quoted,  13 


Kent,  Chancellor,  232,  234,  235, 

274,315- 
"Kentucky     Resolutions,"     102, 

133 

King,  Henry  C.f  quoted,  8 
Knox,  General,  100,  119,  250,  253 
Knox,  Philander  C.,  quoted,  9 


Lafayette,  opinion  of  Washington, 

26,313:250,254,339 
Lament,  T.  W.,  quoted,  n 
Landis,  Judge  K.  M.,  quoted,  47 
Lane,  Franklin  K.,  quoted,  8 


Lansing,  Robert,  quoted,  3 
Laurens,  ill,  250 
Lawson,  Victor,  quoted,  32 
League  of  Nations,  166,  285 
Lee,  Robert  E.,  37,  60 
Lincoln,  compared  with  Hamilton, 
152,    162,   282,   293,   305,   306, 

307,  313,  334 

"Little  Sarah,"  case  of,  93 
Lodge,  Henry  Cabot,  quoted,  70 
Longfellow,  7 

Lowden,  Frank  O.,  quoted,  16 
Lowell's  "Commemoration  Ode" 

to  Lincoln,  3,  16,  21 
Louisiana,  acquisition  of,  132,  257 


M 


McAdoo,    W.    G.,    statement   re 
garding  statue  of  Hamilton,  340 
McCall,  Samuel  W.,  quoted,  49 
McCullough  vs.  Maryland,  229 
McHenry,     James,      opinion     of 

Hamilton,  177 

McKinley,  William,  142,  293 
McLaughlin,  A.  G.,  quoted,  13 
McRae,  Milton  W.,  quoted,  50 
MacCracken,  John  H.,  quoted,  27 
Madison,    James,    89,    118,    122; 
contributed     to     "Federalist," 
144;^  183,    188,   203,   216,   310; 
opinion  of  Hamilton,  336 
Manual  on  Practice  of  Law,  by 

Hamilton,  225 

Manufactures,  Report  on,  195 
Marshall,  John,  18,  39,  42,  58,  71, 

216,  229,  321,  339 
Marshall,  Thomas  R.,  quoted,  51 
Maryland    ratified    Constitution, 

126 

Massachusetts  ratified  Constitu 
tion,  126 
"Meeting  in  The  Fields,"  77,  lio, 

129,  261 

Menocal,  Mario  G.,  quoted,  41 
Merchant  Marine,  157 
Monmouth  Court  House,  battle 

of,  249 

"Monroe  Doctrine,"  157,  285 
Monroe,  James,  203,  286,  288,  312 
Morris,  Gouverneur,  117,  122,  136, 
295 


351 


Snbex 


Morris.  Robert,  80,  82,  174,  175, 

179 

Moses,  George  H.,  quoted,  60 
Muhlenberg,  288,  290 


N 


National  Banking  System,  87, 
'3i.  I75»  178.  181,  227 

Nelson,  Knute,  quoted,  9 

Neutrality  Proclamation  93,  219, 
283 

Newburgh  Rebellion,  82,  101,  266 

New  England  Separatist  Move 
ment,  140 

New  Hampshire  Grants.  268 

New  Hampshire  ratified  Constitu 
tion,  127 

''New  Jersey  Plan"  for  Constitu 
tion,  117 

New  Jersey  ratified  Constitution, 
126 

Nivelle,  General,  at  grave  of 
Roosevelt,  59 

Northern  Confederacy,  105 

Noyes,  Frank  B.,  quoted,  27 


0 


Oliver's  Essay  on  Hamilton,  xvi. 
Osborn,  Chase  S.,  quoted,  15 


"Pacificus"  Essays,  93,  219 

Parker,  Alton  B.,  quoted,  29 

Patent  System,  196,  278 

Pennsylvania  ratified  Constitu 
tion,  126 

Phillips,  Wendell,  7 

"Phocion"  Essays,  211 

Pinchot.  GifTord,  quoted,  57 

Pinckney,  Charles,  253 

Pinckney.  Thomas,  98 

Postal  System.  278 

Presidential  term,  discussed  by 
Hamilton,  168 

Proctor,  Thomas  Redfield,  280 

Public  Credit.  Report  on,  1 80 

Publicity,  Hamilton  advocates,  82 

'•Publius'   Essays,  144 

Putnam,  Herbert,  quoted,  3 


R 


Randolph,  188 

Rathom,  John  R.,  quoted,  17 
Reed,  James  A.,  quoted,  38 
Representation,         Congressional 

basis  of,  159 
Reynolds  Case,  286 
Rhode     Island,     protest     against 

taxation,  81 

Rhodes,  J.  F.,  quoted,  45 
Richmond,  C.  A.,  quoted,  14 
Robinson,  Prof.  E.  E.,  quoted,  332 
Rockefeller,  John,  Jr.,  quoted,  n 
Roosevelt,  Franklin,  quoted.  36 
Roosevelt,  Theodore,  5,  7,  II,  21, 

32,  45,  46,  50,  56,  57,  58,  59,  68, 

117,  153-  154,  203,  316,  317,  330 
Root,  Elihu,  quoted,  281 


"Shay's  Rebellion."  83 
Shaw,  Leslie  M.,  quoted,  36 
Scott,  W.  D.,  quoted,  34 
Scripps,  E.  W.,  quoted,  44 
Sherman,  L.  Y.,  quoted,  8 
Sims,  Admiral,  quoted,  43 
Sinclair,  Upton,  quoted,  n 
Smith,  H.  L.,  quoted,  59 
Smith,  Melancthon,  125,  129 
Smith,  William  Alden,  quoted,  8 
Society  of  the  Cincinnati,  120 
South  Carolina  ratifies  Constitu 
tion,  126 

Spargo,  John,  quoted,  1 1 
Spencer,  Judge  Ambrose,  quoted, 

3i8 

Spencer,  S.  P.,  quoted,  32 
Sproul,  W.  C.,  quoted,  34 
Stoddard,  Henry  L.,  quoted,  9 
Story,  Judge,  228 
Straus,  Oscar  S.,  quoted,  61 
Sumner's  resolution  on  death  of 

Lincoln,  9 
Suzzallo,  Henry,  quoted,  35 


Taft,  William  H.,  quoted,  44 
Tariff  Protection,  87,  182,  196,  200 
Taxation,  87,  177,  188 


352 


Snfcex 


Taylor,  Charles  H.,  quoted,  46 
Thomas,  Charles  S.,  quoted,  24 
Tilden,  Samuel  J.,  52,  68,  319 
Trade,  Department  of,  201 
Treasury,  Department  of,  86,  178, 

202,  205,  343 

Treat,  Prof.  P.  J.,  quoted,  332 
Turner,  F.  J.,  quoted,  19 
Tyler,  L.  G.,  quoted,  30 


U 


Underwood,  Oscar,  quoted,  32 
University  of  New  York,  268 


V 


Van  Dyke,  Henry,  quoted,  45 
Van  Tyne,  Prof.,  poll  of  History 

Class,  58 
Venables,  288 
Versailles  Treaty,  147,  274 
"Virginia  Plan"  for  Constitution, 

117 
Virginia  ratifies  Constitution,  128 


W 


Wallace,  Henry  C.,  quoted,  57 

War  casualties,  53 

Washington,  George;  meets  Ham 
ilton,  243 ,  relations  with  Hamil 
ton,  79,  89,  92,  93,  95,  118,  120, 
189,  221,  245,  246,  249,  250, 
254,  278,  284,  Senate's  grief  on 


death   of,    29:   letter   to    Gov 
ernors,  1 12,  letter  to  Hamilton, 
204,  his  papers  written  by  Ham 
ilton,      210       compared     with 
Hamilton,  281,  308,  313,  334 
Washington,  locating  city  of,  186 
Washington's    Farewell    Address, 

143,  220,  285,  309 

Webster,  Daniel,  18,  42,  50,  60,  68, 

129.  opinion  of  Hamilton,  205; 

3i8. 339 

Webster,  Pelatiah,  xii. 
Weeks,  John  W.,  quoted,  38 
Welles  announcement  of  Lincoln's 

death,  4 

West  Point  founded,  259,  278 
"Whiskey    Rebellion,"    95,    132, 

191,  252 
White,  Stewart  Edward,  quoted, 

46 

White,  William  Allen,  quoted,  5 
White  Plains,  Battle  of,  244 
Wilson,  James,  122 
Wilson,  Woodrow,  21,  46,  60,  68, 

203,  206,  266,  274,  277,  285 
Williams,  John  Sharpe,  quoted,  32 
Williams,  Roger,  61,  68,  203 
Willis,  Frank  B.,  quoted,  23 
Wise,  Rabbi,  quoted,  23 
Wood,  General,  quoted,  45;  153 

XYZ 

"X.  Y.  Z.  Papers,"  100 
Yorktown,  Battle  of,  251 


353 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

l|ie°p°Jo°( 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or       [Jf^S 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 
Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


^J  I  ~~~             — 

J^Lj 

.•aN  5    1963 

JHJIU  *^W 

JflN  1  1  'fifl  -g  pM 

nro  +  r\  »/•»<••»    to  ki 

nr»T  n1^  1dM"*v> 

ULL1  0  OJ-12.M 
wnv  2  1  1965  ft  A 

OCT  a*  »j^9 

REGEIYED 

-  n"'  fr 
REC'D  LD 

QCY^  r  f  n^i  PM 

65     PM 

Uyl  /,  I'  OJ    I  ' 

i^ftAM    Dftf*T» 

MAR  10  1966  4  4 

|W10'6688RCD 

* 

RECEIVF 

D 

NOW  °  Q  'RR  - 

)  *\M 

N^Cu                            ^   /    DO 
&R-C  1  r^AKi    r^crt 

1  Am 
rr  —  

LD  21A-50m-3,'62 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


